If one says that scientific evidence is the only kind of evidence, then philosophy is just a part of science. But if we say that philosophy works with forms of evidence not limited to scientific evidence, then the use of evidence is not itself sufficient to distinguish science.
-
-
Replying to @ComplaintStick
Give me an example of a form of evidence not limited to scientific evidence? Are we talking about evidence of things not generally studied by the natural sciences - eg medieval manuscripts being evidence of beliefs held in that period?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Do you think philosophy just argues about scientific evidence?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ComplaintStick
Give me an example of a form of evidence not limited to scientific evidence? Are we talking about evidence of things not generally studied by the natural sciences - eg medieval manuscripts being evidence of beliefs held in that period?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ComplaintStick
I cannot know what you are saying unless you define 'Evidence which is not scientific.' If there is some point you want to make, please make it. I don't want to waste any more time trying to get you to actually say something.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ComplaintStick
I think philosophy does a lot of things. The question here is does *your* philosophy work on evidence which is actually evident. If it does, great. If not, I would rather you did it elsewhere.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
"Philosophy does a lot of things" definitely counts as vague.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ComplaintStick
Yes, I'll openly admit I have no wish to get into all the forms of philosophy and what they do. This does not interest me. If you have no wish to get into what you mean by 'evidence which is not scientific' and that does not interest you, I'll move on.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I didn't say anything about "all the forms" but OK.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ComplaintStick
No, I did. To not be vague about what philosophy does, that is what I'd have to do. You're clearly not going to say anything, It's all red herrings, diversions and vagueness on a topic you chose to (fail to) engage with. Why waste my time? You could have just not responded.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I can't mute you without unfollowing so I'll have to do that. I bear you no ill will tho and you're very welcome to keep following me. I just don't want to waste time on this kind of waffle again. I need to mute a lot now to keep using Twitter or I just get bogged down like this.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.