3 Focusing the intent of the question; clarifying the critique
source | link

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody interested in philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might investigate it further, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you've offered nothing of philosophical value and otherwise presented confused fundamental accounts of philosophical issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If a statement corresponds to reality, it is true otherwise it is false. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticizing them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody interested in philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might investigate it further, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you've offered nothing of philosophical value and otherwise presented confused fundamental issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If a statement corresponds to reality, it is true otherwise it is false. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticizing them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody interested in philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might investigate it further, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you've offered nothing of philosophical value and otherwise presented confused fundamental accounts of philosophical issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If a statement corresponds to reality, it is true otherwise it is false. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticizing them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

2 Focusing the intent of the question; clarifying the critique
source | link

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody loveinterested in philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might adoptinvestigate it further, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you haveyou've offered nothing of philosophical value to offer and you are hopelesslyotherwise presented confused on fundamental issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If an ideaa statement corresponds to reality, it is true otherwise it is notfalse. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticisingcriticizing them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody love philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might adopt it, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you have nothing of value to offer and you are hopelessly confused on fundamental issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If an idea corresponds to reality, otherwise it is not. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticising them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody interested in philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might investigate it further, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you've offered nothing of philosophical value and otherwise presented confused fundamental issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If a statement corresponds to reality, it is true otherwise it is false. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticizing them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.

1
source | link

There is a sense among most parents that only Engineering and Medicine are important. That view is much worse when it comes to philosophy. My friend thinks it's a non-practical, useless, confusing object. But I have discussed with him about Epistemology and talking about knowing that the truth is related to perspective and that there is no real truth. Then he said "Ok. I understood we can't know truth about anything --then what?"

Your friend is wrong about philosophy per se being impractical, useless and confusing. Your particular ideas are impractical, useless and confusing and false.

First, there is your question about making somebody love philosophy. You can't. If you can offer him something he values he might adopt it, but you can't make him adopt it, nor should you try.

Second, you have nothing of value to offer and you are hopelessly confused on fundamental issues. Truth is correspondence to reality. If an idea corresponds to reality, otherwise it is not. It is perfectly possible to understand the world, and to generate true objective knowledge. The explanation for how this is possible involves physics. It is possible to construct universal computers that can simulate any physical system to any desired degree of accuracy:

http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/akl/cisc879/papers/SELECTED.../ItFromQubit.pdf

It is possible to create knowledge by looking for problems with current knowledge, proposing solutions to those problems and criticising them until only one is left, then you look for a new problem. The process of criticism involves working out what would happen if the theory is true which involves calculating the consequences of your guess: computation. You them compare the consequences of your guess to reality. For more on computation, physics and epistemology see "The Fabric of Reality" and "The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch. for more on espistemology see "Realism and the Aim of Science" by Karl Popper, Chapter I and "Objective Knowledge" by Popper Chapter 1.