The value of a non-scientific education ...

[EternalOptimist]

Is there an un-dodgy cup of hemlock?

sorry, scouser sense of humour. double mobius joke. - not suitable for a friday afternoon

[EternalOptimist]

What is hogwash?

Who owns a hog, and why does it need washing?

listen.

stop it or you wont get a friday story

[BrilloPad]

What would happen if all the philosophers in the world went on strike tomorrow ?

They would go out of their cosy university environments saving the government money and get real jobs paying taxes to the government? The money could be spent on reducing other peoples taxes thus saving the government from an election defeat?

I wonder if Gordon is reading this?

[BrilloPad]

listen.

stop it or you wont get a friday story

Last weeks was ace - will it be of the same quality?

[Bagpuss]

Plagarised from Socrates, but a good effort at translation.

The "I wager bit" is actually a conversation involving a slave boy and the diagonal of a square, but well done indeed.

I've got my window really small, so initally couldn't see who posted this, but I knew it was you before I scrolled accross. You Sir are as mad as a box of frogs.

[Lucy]

Last weeks was ace - will it be of the same quality?

Ace?

Are you stuck in somekind of 80s timewarp?

[HairyArsedBloke]

What would happen if all the philosophers in the world went on strike tomorrow ?

Industrial action by The Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries and Other Thinking Persons.

Mmmmmmm.

[TimberWolf]

Is there any 'real' difference between the Socratic and Scientific methods? Remembering that much of modern science is actually based on 'thought experiments' too.

Any similarly is probably coincidental. The scientific (and perhaps Socratic) methods are based on the ‘what works, works’ principle IMO. The rest (and vast majority) is junked. The difference is that science is validated by empirical evidence (i.e. asking and obtaining answers from nature), while with philosophy answers presumably come from discussion or from other namby pambie mumbo-jumbo sources? Einstein and others used thought experiments, but scientists have been testing them in real life ever since.

[Troll]

...is virtually nil, IMHO.
Plenty of slightly clever people study pseudo-sciences like Economics or Politics etc. yet have no clue about the value or not of their so-called knowledge. They don't have a clue about the epistemological basis of their discipline - but are good at writing essays and passing exams.
I would wager that I could get an advanced degree in any non-scientific discipline purely by sticking to the current zeitgeist.
If people can't grasp the basics of the scientific method or the mathematical and statistical underpinnings of evidence-based knowledge, what fliping use are their opinions?

Did they do science in your third-rate inner-city comp?

[BrilloPad]

Ace?

Are you stuck in somekind of 80s timewarp?

Yeeeeaaahhh grrrooovvyy bbbaabbbyyy!