Limited Philosophy 03, the difference between philosophy and science
Philosophy is about ignorance, while science is based on the knowledge of the world. This fundamental difference separates philosophy and science into two worlds. Although there is also a close connection between these two worlds, enough to connect science and philosophy, it is by no means enough to let one world dominate the other. Philosophy is neither a scientific science nor can it lay a so-called reliable foundation for science. What it can contribute to science is only inspiration for science in terms of ideas.
The previous article said that "Philosophy is about ignorance" is very different from the self-feeling of philosophy, so we have a brief discussion to cultivate new feelings. Understanding the difference between science and philosophy can play a role in this regard. In ancient times, human knowledge with a slightly advanced feeling was basically included in the philosophical system (in a broad sense, religious knowledge also belongs to philosophy knowledge), and without the philosophical system, it can only be called empirical common sense. However, the exploration of philosophy has cultivated the ability to think scientifically, thus opening the door to science for the development of empirical common sense. When Archimedes discovered the principle of buoyancy and leverage, this took the prototype of modern science. The advancement of ancient Chinese technology represented by the four great inventions provides the greatest momentum for technology to return to science.
But when modern science truly develops, science is no longer the adopted son of philosophy, but is completely self-employed, and philosophy and science are on a completely different path. Although philosophers still have the ambition to unify science, they have no choice but to see that science is powerful enough to guide the world and inspire words, and they are no longer the weak boy who needs their own protection.
The key is that philosophers find that they do not have the ability to provide the protection they need for modern science. Philosophers also said that they should summarize science and make philosophy a science of science, but in the end they found that their summary was not the summary needed by scientists at all. For example, philosophy wants to summarize the entire universe, but from Newtonian mechanics to relativity mechanics and quantum mechanics , scientists actually want to grasp the entire universe, but the grasping methods of philosophers and scientists are completely different. Scientists pursue the final unified theory and want to use a principle and a formula to explain various basic forces, but philosophers are still obsessed with mysterious concepts such as objective reality. Scientists even think that the philosophers' nagging is a bit hindered. They think that there is just a common sense of objective reality, but philosophers always want to speak out many tricks.
Philosophers also wanted to lay a reliable foundation for science, but although their intentions were lofty, they still returned to the mysterious concept that scientists avoided. A distinctive example is Husserl's phenomenology. The research goal of Husserl's is to provide a truly reliable foundation for scientific knowledge, but what he finally came up with is still "facing things themselves, the mystery of phenomenology , the restoration of essence, the priori restoration, and the return to the world of life" and other mysterious concepts that are enough to make philosophers enjoy themselves, but cannot provide much help to scientists. What scientists want are formulas and theorems. As for scientific research methods, they may be able to get some inspiration from philosophers' empty talk, such as the so-called "transcendental intuition", but they will definitely reject the basic methods of philosophers. In the eyes of scientists, the thinking of philosophers is not scientific in general.
Why is there such a clear difference between philosophy and science now? There is nothing more than just because philosophy and science are essentially divided into two worlds, one is the world of knowledge and the other is the world of ignorance. Philosophers want to fundamentally grasp the entire universe and to fundamentally grasp people, that is, they must transcend the universe and transcend themselves. However, due to the specific human cognitive ability, people cannot transcend the universe or transcend themselves. Therefore, philosophers are actually doing research on the ignorant world. It is simply a completely different story for philosophers to rely on their perception of the ignorant world.
Limited philosophy three-point diagram
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-