/lit/ - Literature

>>22159655
Scientism is a bugman religion for materialist hedonists. You don't have to be anything in particular to reject it as a limited perspective. You can be a theist, a mystic, an esoteric, a process philosopher, or simply a metaphysical idealist, or all mixtures thereof.

"Believing" in science or materialism can logically be boiled down to "believing" that something exists instead of nothing existing, in exactly the way it does exist (with all its harmonies and symmetries and beauty), for no reason. If you can seriously close your eyes and think "Why is there SOMETHING instead of NOTHING?," really picturing the two alternatives and thinking about the constantly renewing miracle that there "is" a world at all, let alone a beautiful harmonious one that manifests conscious beings capable of inquiring into the nature of being itself, then you can be a materialist. But no person who actually thinks seriously about reality is capable of this except contrarian ultra-midwits like Stephen Hawking trying to score reddit points.

Theres literally only thing you have to pay attention to, if you want to keep up good board hygiene. Do not interact with namefags. Do not reply to namefags.
I repeat for the retards: Do not interact with namefags. Jannies and mods are too retarded to do something about these mentally retarded trannies so its on you. Dont turn this place to reddit.

Did you guys fail math class or something?

I'm trying to compile a list of books for scientists who want to be real seekers of truth rather than mere specialists or artisans.

Any suggestions or charts that you think might come in handy?

>>14573496
>This is absurd, how can it be the nature of perfection to create imperfection?
From the Advaitist position the world is unreal in relation to God and so it's never actually created. No imperfection was actually ever created or emanated. It is the very nature of God's power of māyā to make it falsely appear as though there is an existent world of multiplicity, when in truth only God exists. Some Sufis take a similar position. Neoplatonists who maintain that there is an existent real world which has emanated from the One have a variety of answers to this, not all of them maintain the world as real though, for example Plotinus' disciple Porphyry regarded the world as illusory. You also have to keep in mind that someone could respond that perfection and imperfection exist only in the mind of the observer and that your point is not a valid objection because those concepts don't correspond to anything existent/real; or someone could even maintain that perfection is real but that we are incapable of understanding it with the human mind and that what we perceive as an imperfect emanation is actually a part of the greater perfection of the One/God.
>In my eyes this is actually an argument against Platonist-esque metaphysics, that they cannot give a coherent explanation of the emanation of the material world from a divine source
Maybe so but that argument lacks teeth against the position of Advaita and the other groups who deny that the universe is a real and independent/created entity or field
>Materialism doesn't face such philosophical difficulties because it denies that there is a higher reality from where our world originates.
But materialism faces a whole host of other philosophical difficulties, such as the hard problem of consciousness, the countless test results done by respectable labs demonstrating the low incidence but still existent phenomena of ESP (which Carl Sagan for example said should be taken seriously), and materialism's utter inability to explain why the universe exists. All the answers of materialism end up going back to some form of describing a thing within the manifested universe like quantum foam etc but no physicists or any experimental model has any good answer for why existence/universe/quantum whatever exists instead of nothing, nobody can explain why the big bang happened, or if they try to nobody can explain what caused the set of circumstances which themselves caused it.

obligatory

Jesus Christ this is pathetic, at least the replies to his dumb tweet give me some hope . When will these clowns stop? are they trying to replace philosophers?

>>14057640
>imagine being the pathetic IFUCKINGLOVESCIENCE retard who made that shitty pic

>>13816606
only popsci twitter Discovery Channel I fucking love science burgers do this. Real , non-celebrity sciencist were /lit/

>>13719371
Does he reference and understand all 3 well? If so I would be interested in reading him, Coomaraswamy is the only author I've found that copiously quotes all 3

bump

>>13165762
searching for meaning is meaning itself. it's not about catching a rabbit, its about chasing it.
searching for happiness is a trap.
mathematics and philosophy combined leads to enlightenment and transcendence.
information exist in a platonic sense ,information is an pure abstract which is beyond space,time,matter .
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.(2 Corinthians 4:18 )
ancient literature and philosophy is even more important than new.
language is a form of philosophy,in some form ancient languages were far more advanced than the modern ones.
God sometimes speak to you through your conscience.
Neither pleasure nor pain should enter as motives when one must do what must be done.
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.(Ecclesiastes 1:9)

how old were you when you took the anti-philosophy pill? Dante warned us when he had visions of philosophers in a sort of null, purgatory zone in hell.

you have no business meddling with philosphical quesitons, and not only that, but it also is not healthy for you to question such things.

There is a lot going in that image.

One is tempted to say that the difference in perspectives is the difference between serious geniuses and pop scientists.
On the other hand, one could say that difference is due to changing attitudes towards religion between the early 20th century and the early 21st century.
Of course, you could say that the difference between the Anglo tradition and the continental tradition of philosophy.

What do you think /lit/?

>>11875510
The Greeks

>>11182757
True

>>9384238
Nice try, I'm an engineering major. The whole scientific method is built on analytic philosophy, it's what allows us to tell which theories are valid and which ones aren't.

What has cosmology done for us? Sure, it gives us a greater understanding of the universe, but likewise philosophy gives us a better understanding of reason and morals. Why is one arbitrarily better than the other?

I don't understand these threads. You're asking literal autists on the internet for help on deciding your future. Do whatever the fuck you want, you have the freedom. I understand getting a degree for job security, but you have to at least enjoy the subject area, don't fall for memes you don't enjoy.