Some scientists shy away from philosophy, discard it as it has got
nothing to do with anything.

Other 200+ IQ people read with great interest Plato.

How is it possible that science is so ambivalent about philosophy?

Imo philosophy is an integral part of the universal genius.

What does this ng think?

Life has no meaning. that is all you need to know about philosophy.
best not to think about it or you will depressed. people with high IQ's
choose to believe in God . High IQ doesnt make life have meaning.

Vince@Vincemail.com wrote:

On 28 Sep 2006 22:16:39 -0700, seatosummit28@yahoo.com wrote:

I offer you my reply:

It's not quite that intellectual, but is it true?

If you are having an AWESOME time, THAT's your meaning. You don't ask
for any other meaning. Happiness is a meaning in its own right.

Or would you perhaps think otherwise?

There are two paths to the same end on earth.
Science and spirit.
Science seeks to explain mathematically and with physics the wonders of the
Universe.
They see water rise up out of the ocean and the...

Because the scientific community is only interested in substantiating what
they can measure. Their academic training has taught them that is the only
way to conduct investigations.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 05:53:52 +0200, Vince@Vincemail.com wrote:

Some 200+ IQ people collect stamps. Enough said.

Vince@Vincemail.com wrote:

Being not 200+ IQ, but nevertheless a scientist, I can tell from my
subjective point of view, that science contains quite a bit of
philosophy.

Obviously I don't discard philosophy, but I think all actually relevant
philosophic questions are answered.

It's interesting to read Plato, but not that much to learn about life,
but to learn what people thought in ancient times.

Vince@Vincemail.com wrote:

Scientists may be interested in particular philosophers and or
philosophies, if a philosophical question occaisionally arises from
their research and pesters them with social attention or even rebuke.
Scientists are generally interested in empiricism and theories of what
knowledge is and how to state things in truthful ways. This would make
them interested in particular philosophies of particular philosophers.
Plato for instance speaks to this subject a bit in the Theaetetus;

The greater part of the dialogue is devoted to setting up and throwing
down definitions of science and knowledge. Proceeding from the lower to
the higher by three stages, in which perception, opinion,...

Vince@Vincemail.com wrote:

Philosophy IS science, the most important science of all sciences.

But a lot of people want to talk about theology and they have mistaken
philosophy for theology, so the philosophy newsgroups are heavily
infested by theologian thinkers, mystics and angry superhumans, poetic
passionated people who like to play with words in their passionated
state of mind, who are in wrong newsgroups.

If you are going to talk about religion in a scientific, philosophical
newsgroup you should treat religion as a sociological phenomenon, and
discuss its properties, consequences and history from a scientific
viewpoint, and in clear language.
Religion is one of the important problems in the world and a scientific
treatment of religion, social secrets, traditional values, manly
attitudes and gender roles is really at home in the field of
philosophy.

All of our sciences began as philosophical questions and philosophical
questions pop up along the way after a scientific field is born. For
example, physics and chemistry grew out of questions about what the world is
made of, psychology from reflecting what goes on in the mind and whether or
not people are always reasonable or if there are unconscious motivations at
work in their lives.

The mind-body problem is a current problem that straddles the neurobiology
and philosophy and interests both philosophers and scientists.