Any chance that the philosophy section of YA could become more systematic, scientific?

Question

valid responses from all, and the objective-subjective duality emerges too!

Answer 1

Some, but all magic comes with a price. =P

Or, um... more specifically, any change like that isn't going to come from Yahoo! Answers.  Even from the site's name (why is it not 'Yahoo! Questions', for example?), we can probably presume Yahoo's demographic is not the systematic/scientific.  So the only ways the philosophy section would become more systematic and scientific would come from users, having the price of elitism.

Answer 2

philosophy isn't a science, it's an art. You need to go to the science category for that. Art is subjective and doesn't need any authority or society to "verify" it. If you want a social encounter try the singles and dating category.

Answer 3

Well let see a definition, Philosophy is a lover of wisdom; I like how that sounds.

    * Philosophy

    

< philosophize -philous >

phi�los�o�phy �audio� (f-ls-f) KEY �

NOUN:

pl. phi�los�o�phies

   1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.

   2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

   3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.

   4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.

   5. The disciplines presented in university curriculum of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.

   6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.

   7. A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.

   8. A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.

ETYMOLOGY:

Middle English philosophie, from Old French, from Latin philosophia, from Greek philosophi, from philosophos, lover of wisdom, philosopher ; see philosopher

Answer 4

Why? Isn't philosophy supposed to be questions and theories about life, free thought and expression? Not hard cold "facts"? I think the point of philosophy is to question or reinterpret the "facts", nothing in philosophy is CONCRETE..it should be free-flowing and ever-changing, shouldn't it?

Answer 5

My pal Derrida says no...

Answer 6

yes, if you couldn't repeat questions, and it was instead subdivided, and with permanent questions that could be discussed and added to over time. kind of like a wikipedia thing but with voting over an infinite amount of time, questions that must remain open. i would like it better that way at any rate.

shonen-ai, plato and aristotle and the such can still be prevalent in thought because if it ain't broke don't fix it. philosophy is like science in that it must be allowed to flow, to be ever changing. it is things like religion that remain the same forever. knowledge can always be built upon and added and understandings of things can always be refined as more is uncovered over time. but still, as you pointed out some things stay the same, usually the basics. like math. nothing will be ever proven wrong about math, but it will always be added to and improved upon.

Answer 7

Not with people like "sue" asking and answering. They don't get what philosophy is. If it is supposed to be "ever flowing" than why are Plato and Aristotle still so large in our philosophy today? No one can propose anything at all without  it being comparable to something one of those two thought of all those years ago, either metaphysically or epistemologically.

Even new science relies on Aristotelean epistemology, in the sense that it is impossible to argue with his 256 forms of deductive logic.

Answer 8

Yes. Philosophy is a bit abstract, but any good thought should be tested for its validity in making life better. Better life can be measured even if those expressions being measured are subjective.

I am in favor of putting everything to the test.