Jayson_Virissimo comments on Train Philosophers with Pearl and Kahneman, not Plato and Kant - Less Wrong

65 Post author: lukeprog 06 December 2012 12:42AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (510)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 05 December 2012 08:13:57AM *  3 points [-]

The most polite way would be to call it a new subset of philosophy, let's say "Scientific Philosophy" (or something else if this name is already taken), and then open Scientific Philosophy courses. Nobody would get offended by this.

On the other hand, it would give people easy opportunity to ignore it. They could just teach Philosophy as they did before... and perhaps include one useless short lecture on Scientific Philosophy just to show that: yeah, they heard about it.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 05 December 2012 08:37:58AM *  1 point [-]

It is already taken (see Reichenbach's The Rise of Scientific Philosophy), but it arguably means something very similar to what Luke seems to be advocating anyway (that is to say, it seems to be in the same direction that Carnap, Reichenbach, and some of the other logical empiricists were moving in after the mid-20th century), so I don't think it would be much of a problem.