For those that are interested:
1) What is the difference in the means of testing for falsehood in philosophy, law, and science?
2) Proposition for philosophy and logic: Is the requirement for continuous recursive disambiguation a better test than non-contradiction?
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-11 16:21:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1480937844650741765
Reply addressees: @philosophybites
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1480623860466786310
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@philosophybites Painful truth: philosophy as other than the study of intellectual history – meaning the evolution of the sciences – is (empirically) dead. So ‘interesting’ is a useful means of evading that fact, where ‘best’ would have in the past. Now: Truth=Science, Preference=Philosophy.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1480623860466786310
Leave a Reply