3

What Sartre has in mind is that every other being in nature has a developmental pattern intrinsic to it. It has an essential nature, or 'essence', and its nature fixes its future development. Acorns become oak trees. Lambs become sheep. Uniquely, human beings as persons or agents have no such inherent developmental pattern or essence. As Sartre slightly ...


3

This answer is really over simplified, but other answers have ample detail. I want to give you a bitesize version of why this question is slightly wrong headed, and that the two examples in question aren't the best for whatever might be your underlying concern. I'll then suggest a better comparison. The two can't be compared. Logical Positivism was an ...


2

Ted Wrigley's response is an excellent characterization of the historical and ontological differences between the two philosophical movements you invoke in your question. Both movements are characterizations of the tensions which might be viewed in a Hegelian dialectical lens: rational and empiricism, analytical and continental philosophy, objectivity and ...


2

I'm afraid this question misconstrues the nature of Logical Positivism and its relationship to the sciences and philosophy. Logical Positivism did not yield "all the progress in the natural science and technology," and was never intended to do so. Historically speaking, it's the other way around: Logical Positivism observed the progress that is consistently ...


2

Pseudoscience is nonscience masquerading as science by its practitioners, who use scientific language and references to mathematics and fields of science in order to make their argument appear scientifically rigorous when it is not at all. As such it is deliberate fraud. Nonscience makes no claim to scientific rigor and does not borrow scientific ...


1

The Wikipedia article on constructivist epistemology may provide the key references and overview you are looking for. Regarding philosophy of science and constructivism they write: Thomas Kuhn argued that changes in scientists' views of reality not only contain subjective elements, but result from group dynamics, "revolutions" in scientific practice and ...


1

Philosophy and science should not be confused. In philosophy something may be proven or demonstrated. As Edward Feser puts it (page 235), philosophical arguments are more like (though of course not exactly like) the proofs of geometry than they are like the probabilistic hypotheses put forward in empirical science. One could, of course, try to show that ...


1

Is Noam's Logic legit? No, it's not. Opinion and logic do not go hand in hand. Geocentricism, relativity, evolution were refused and ridiculed at first then accepted. The human mind has trouble adapting itself to changes particularly after centuries of indoctrination or general misconception. See troubles with revolutions of the mind. Does a minority ...


1

This sounds like a HW question, so you need to edit your question to contain your argument for finding answers 3 and 4 correct, so that instead of just giving you answers, you are forced to defend your reasoning and learn from the question. This also seems to be a duplicate post here. It would help to keep in mind that deductive inference is that which has ...


1

There is no difficulty in assuming that we don't actually know anything about the material world. We don't even need to claim to know that we know nothing about it since we may believe it is the case, or indeed believe it is not the case. It won't make any difference if we can only have beliefs about the material world and it won't make any difference if we ...


1

Very interesting question. If naturalism means in part that there is no philosophy prior to science (philosophy is continuous with science) as Quine says then there are reasons to think that Lewis' philosophyical views may not be completely naturalist. I have in mind his appeal to what he calls perfectly natural properties and their role in his accounts ...


1

Consciousness is the only aspect of reality that is not verifiably vanishable. Even blackouts are only verifiably black-ins, with a last moment of blackness being recalled before coming-to. As I wrote in an essay for the Journal of Consciousness Studies, there is a legitimate science of correlation between brain states and consciousness, but no science of ...


1

There are a lot of good answers here already. I want to expand on them a bit. The simple answer to the question is that not all true or false answers give us the same amount of information, and that there are certain false answers that are closer to the truth than other false answers. A quick example of this is to say "I am driving at 45mph." Well if I am ...


1

Simulation Hypothesis is already part of science. Quantum mechanics scientists produced a paper in 2017 to test the double slit experiment in a new way specifically to try to prove or disprove Simulation Hypothesis. Here is CalTech's paper about the test: http://users.cms.caltech.edu/~owhadi/index_htm_files/IJQF2017.pdf


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible