Cap'n Refsmmat

Recommended Philosophical Reading

Recommended Posts

I meant the awful "science at the bar" - rather than the terrible "the demise..."

 

You not concluding with Ruse's final rebuttal (only a few pages long - but cannot find it now)? Seems to be the natural conclusion. Presume you have a copy of Barry Gross' Philosophers at the Bar - I downloaded a hooky copy when you first posted the Ruse article - but it seems to have been removed

I didn't know Ruse had a final rebuttal. I just started with Demise, gave the criteria set forth by Ruse, and then completely destroyed Science at the Bar with a vengeance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had

 

LL The Demise...

The Case

MR Creation Science is not Science

LL Science at the Bar

MR Pro Judice

 

The final response from Ruse is published the next pages in the same journal as Science at the Bar. By the way noted this when checking I wasnt going mad.

 

 

post-32514-0-02506800-1362406444_thumb.png

 

Do you know if it ever got published?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final response from Ruse is published the next pages in the same journal as Science at the Bar.

I got Demise and Science at the Bar from Laudan's book. Ruse's reply was not included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosmologist Brian Greene states and then explains in the March 2013 issue of New Scientist magazine that "What makes us so sure that mathematics can provide answers to some of the deepest workings of nature."

 

East (Classical Buddhism) meets West (Quantum Physics) in the following three books:

 

1. The Mind and the Brain (Schwartz, Jeffrey M.; Begley, Sharon)

2. The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science (Doidge, Norman)

3. The Plastic Mind (Begley, Sharon)

 

Hitachi research labs: Ibid.,

p. 7.

"God does not play dice":

Einstein's exact words,

in a letter to Cornel

Lanczos on March 21,

1942, But that he

would choose to play

dice with the world...is

something I cannot be-

lieve for a single mo-

ment."

1. John Bell

2. Stapp, H.

3. Everett. H., Iii.

4. Pagels, H.

5. Wigner

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

100.

1000.

 

If the atoms never swerve

so as to originate some

new movement that will

snap the bonds of fate, the

everlasting sequence of cause and effect-what is

the source of the free will

possessed by living things

throughout the earth?

-Lucretius, On the Nature

of the Universe, Book 2

 

French philosopher Rene Descartes (1596-1650)

res cogitans

res ex-tensa

 

"Restraint everywhere"

Dhammapa, Verse

361.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam Harris, The Moral Landscap, also The end of Faith and Free Will. Not purely philospohical, but there is enough discussion of philosophy that they fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who get into online battles and feel they should not, a thread in http://secularbuddhism.org/forum/ may help. It starts with the following post:

 

I find myself getting caught up in these endless angry debates online in regards to injustices in the world etc. Its usually very political and binary. I dont have any other voice in the world apart from having my two cents worth online and so i feel quite powerless. I like to believe that somehow it might make a difference but ultimately Im doubtful that I can ever persuade a staunch right wing christian that their anti gay rhetoric is wrong and harmful. The compulsion I feel is so strong that I end up spending hours and hours arguing with people. Its like an addiction. I feel confused about this and think it may be very unskillful and causing myself suffering. How could I try to see this through a buddhist perspective and let go more?

And, several replies tell personal stories of how they quit and work towards quitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Treatise of Human Nature, by David Hume, is the work of his I'm most familiar with. My senior year thesis in college was actually about this book, and how it can lend some persective to early problems in quantum mechanics. (If you can believe that.) I didn't find it dry at all, personally, but by that time I was used to reading some far more dry philosophy. If you want to know where science comes from, I recommend The New Organon, by Francis Bacon. Or A Discourse on Method by Rene Descartes, if you don't mind obnoxious Frenchmen.Other philosophers that might be of particular interest to the scientist or science enthusiast are Leibniz (probably better known as the simultaneous inventor of calculus with Isaac Newton) and Spinoza (of the frequently invoked by Einstein). But honestly, they might be more of the "don't try this at home" variety for curious laymen.Guys like Kant, Hegel, Nietsche, etc. are going to be more important to philosophy generally, but I don't know they could really be approached without a background in all the earlier philosophers they are responding to.

 

Hey Sis!

 

Well I'm compelled to comment on your excellent list for a couple reasons. One, the ironic one, is that I was going to offer a philosophy book for this thread that actually had your username in its title...Yes, that one! The Myth of Sisyphus by the great Albert Camus.

 

Also, you mentioned my favorite philosopher, well, along with Socrates, that is, and he is Baruch Spinoza. Who has been called by many The Father of Pantheism. I consider myself of that same belief. And you're correct about Einstein. Christians and other Theists often like to throw some of Einstein's God quotes at atheists as proof that this great mind of science was a Theist. Well, you and I and anyone who is familiar with Einstein's works knows that is totally wrong. Einstein WAS a Pantheist, at least, he subscribed to many tenets of that ideology. His God...Is we can even call it that...Was Nature. The Universe. The exquisite appearance of Intelligent Design, that really is just the Laws of Nature and Physics and Cosmology doing their stuff.

 

I also agree that one should first get familiar with the Classic Greeks like Socrates and Plato, Aristotle, before delving into the rationalists and the empiricists that came along later...Like Descartes, Kant, Kierkegaard, and those fellows you mentioned. The Greeks with their emphasis on Ethics will set a good base, or cornerstone for the newcomer to philosophy to build upon.

 

I mainly dig Socrates for his sheer chutzpah. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now