Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Whats the most important arts/humanities subject watch

Announcements
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    If you click the fist link to related subject in any wikipedia article you will eventually get back to philosophy.


    :smug:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Important for society? History.

    Important for oneself? Philosophy.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by llys)
    That's actually exactly how I think of it. :lol:
    I just saw your post above which perfectly captures the point I was trying to make :lol:

    Let's take the scientific method - this is the philosophy of science.

    "Philosophy of science looks at the underpinning logic of the scientific method, at what separates science from non-science, and the ethic that is implicit in science. There are basic assumptions, derived from philosophy by at least one prominent scientist, that form the base of the scientific method – namely, that reality is objective and consistent, that humans have the capacity to perceive reality accurately, and that rational explanations exist for elements of the real world."

    Without philosophy, science would still be stuck in the middle ages where people thought walnuts were good for your head because they are shaped like brains. Philosophy looks at the nature of knowledge and tries to define and critically assess assumptions about what we can know.

    In historiography (philosophy of history) there are a lot of questions about truth and subjectivity - can we ever reach historical truth? Can we be objective?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    If you click the fist link to related subject in any wikipedia article you will eventually get back to philosophy.
    :smug:
    Cogito, ergo sum philosopher.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nverjvlev)
    So because something may be misunderstood, it isn't a form of language? If we go by that logic, there is no language as anything can be misunderstood. Sentences can have as many secondary meanings as a piece of art. For example, the sentence "I never said she stole my money" has at least 7 distinct meanings.

    Besides, motifs and recognisable symbols in art can be considered as words. Even colour usage can create specific responses and highlight specific emotions which the majority of people would recognise, just as most people recognise the primary meaning of a word.

    Sorry if I seem attacking, just presenting my opinions, I'm aware that my opinion isn't definitive or more right than anyone else's.
    Nah, I have no problem with someone challenging my opinions! My opinions and beliefs may change into more accurate, and seeing other sides of things is just heatlhy and helps me to form more aware opinion. I enjoy this debate, and you werent offensive at all

    Sure, language systems aren't, unfortunately, fully explicit. However arts how we traditionally consider it is a lot more vague than say, English language. There is also the absolute knowledge system, mathematics, but that is not appliable to everyday communication, and nor is arts.

    While mathematics has its place as science of patterns and tool of many other sciences what is the use of art? I don't think adcertisements are the most essential thing in the existance even thou they are needed too. However usually its not an artist alone who makes ads, its the marketing team, that consists of many other folks besides visual designer.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    If you click the fist link to related subject in any wikipedia article you will eventually get back to philosophy.


    :smug:
    This is true

    (And irl too)
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    Honeslty, I think drawing a line is difficult and maybe even pointless. These things overlap.
    If that's the case and there is no line, then how can we rank one as more important than another?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Puddles the Monkey)

    In historiography (philosophy of history) there are a lot of questions about truth and subjectivity - can we ever reach historical truth? Can we be objective?
    Just been reading the wiki entry on historiography. Why is everyone always naked in portraits... Would we all be better thinkers if we wore no clothes ?



    "
    Allegory on writing history by Jacob de Wit (1754). An almost naked Truth keeps an eye on the writer of history. Pallas Athena (Wisdom) on left gives advice."
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    Nah, I have no problem with someone challenging my opinions! My opinions and beliefs may change into more accurate, and seeing other sides of things is just heatlhy and helps me to form more aware opinion. I enjoy this debate, and you werent offensive at all

    Sure, language systems aren't, unfortunately, fully explicit. However arts how we traditionally consider it is a lot more vague than say, English language. There is also the absolute knowledge system, mathematics, but that is not appliable to everyday communication, and nor is arts.

    While mathematics has its place as science of patterns and tool of many other sciences what is the use of art? I don't think adcertisements are the most essential thing in the existance even thou they are needed too. However usually its not an artist alone who makes ads, its the marketing team, that consists of many other folks besides visual designer.
    I think it's interesting that you think that effective and valuable communication is only that which is perfectly accurate, and that interpretation is therefore irrelevant and obsolete. Also, how you seem to think that the traditional arts are definitive in the context of contemporary art - I'd be intrigued to know how you define art? Surely secondary meanings and the potential for multiple interpretations not only enriches the primary or intended meaning of a piece of literature or art, but also makes it more accessible, allowing greater and deeper interaction from the public?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    8 Great Philosophical questions we will never solve
    Why is there something rather than nothing?
    Is our universe real?
    Do we have free will?
    Does God exist?
    Is there life after death?
    Can you really experience anything objectively?
    What is the best moral system?
    What are numbers?

    Fun to discuss over a beer, no doubt. Useful? Important? Most important?
    And you think we're more likely to get a theory of everything in physics? Now that sir, is fun to discuss while drunk!

    In fact, outside of logic and maths you can't ever really "solve" a question, can you? Hmm? But how do we even know that? Well... philosophy, specifically epistemology XD
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Why is everyone always naked in portraits...

    The past was *way* out there :lol:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Puddles the Monkey)
    I just saw your post above which perfectly captures the point I was trying to make :lol:

    Let's take the scientific method - this is the philosophy of science.

    "Philosophy of science looks at the underpinning logic of the scientific method, at what separates science from non-science, and the ethic that is implicit in science. There are basic assumptions, derived from philosophy by at least one prominent scientist, that form the base of the scientific method – namely, that reality is objective and consistent, that humans have the capacity to perceive reality accurately, and that rational explanations exist for elements of the real world."

    Without philosophy, science would still be stuck in the middle ages where people thought walnuts were good for your head because they are shaped like brains. Philosophy looks at the nature of knowledge and tries to define and critically assess assumptions about what we can know.

    In historiography (philosophy of history) there are a lot of questions about truth and subjectivity - can we ever reach historical truth? Can we be objective?
    See, I am a scientist. And of course I agree with you that historically, philosophy is the mother of all sciences. Historically, it was very important, and I would even agree with "most important". But today, I can honestly say that I have never knowingly used philosophy in the lab, or when writing a paper. Sure, I use processes that historically developed out of philosophy and then were incorporated into science - like heuristic techniques, the distinction between observation and interpretation, correlation and causation, and so on - but today these processes are an integral part of science. Most scientists don't study philosophy any more. Many scientists probably don't even know how their discipline grew out of philosophy. It is not really relevant to their daily life.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TorpidPhil)
    Actually philosophy is unique in that it is the only discipline that can apply itself while being itself... Philosophy of science is not science, but philosophy. You don't really get mathematics of physics though, that, is just part of physics (at least semantically?). I'm not entirely sure about the semantic cause of that... just something I've noticed.

    Still, ignoring that, because my intention was not to raise that point before. I just wanted to show the alternatives. If maths is the king of science then philosophy is the king of maths and... That doesn't sit well with many folks. I suppose the problem is what I alluded to before though - people think then of existentialism and continental feminists ruling over mathematicians. Hahaha. Obviously not... And if people don't want to concede that then must argue that applied maths is not "maths", perhaps meta-maths? You could try and differentiate the two. I suggest taking the route which simplifies this whole "categorising disciplines into different areas" problem. As after all surely the purpose of categorising disciplines by name is to simplify the similarities and differences between them in some way and to make inter-disciplinary comparisons and research easier?
    I'm sorry but you're not offering any kind of justification for this - why can you not accept the idea that the maths of something else is still, in essence, maths?
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by llys)
    See, I am a scientist. And of course I agree with you that historically, philosophy is the mother of all sciences. But today, I can honestly say that I have never knowingly used philosophy in the lab, or when writing a paper. Sure, I use processes that historically developed out of philosophy and then were incorporated into science - like heuristic techniques, the distinction between observation and interpretation, correlation and causation, and so on - but today these processes are an integral part of science. Scientists don't study philosophy any more. Many scientists probably don't even know how their discipline grew out of philosophy. It is not really relevant to their daily life.
    Not just historically; scientists apply philosophy of science every time they run an experiment, or analyse results. You're right that the every day scientist in the lab probably doesn't have a deep understanding of and/or study of philosophy - they just follow the rules - and that's a real shame I think.Either way they're still learning the philosophy at some point.

    There are modern scientists studying and writing new philosophies of science. I don't know enough about this to give you a proper answer though. I'd have to go away and do some reading.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    See, I am a scientist. And of course I agree with you that historically, philosophy is the mother of all sciences. Historically, it was very important, and I would even agree with "most important". But today, I can honestly say that I have never knowingly used philosophy in the lab, or when writing a paper. Sure, I use processes that historically developed out of philosophy and then were incorporated into science - like heuristic techniques, the distinction between observation and interpretation, correlation and causation, and so on - but today these processes are an integral part of science. Most scientists don't study philosophy any more. Many scientists probably don't even know how their discipline grew out of philosophy. It is not really relevant to their daily life.
    You seem like you're making the rather terrible assumption that the present way of science is optimal for achieving all of our human ends. Why on Earth would one think that? And the only way to see what alternatives are better (other ways of doing science or other epistemic tools than science) is to do philosophy. That's why it is so useful - it's necessary for progression.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nverjvlev)
    I think it's interesting that you think that effective and valuable communication is only that which is perfectly accurate, and that interpretation is therefore irrelevant and obsolete. Also, how you seem to think that the traditional arts are definitive in the context of contemporary art - I'd be intrigued to know how you define art? Surely secondary meanings and the potential for multiple interpretations not only enriches the primary or intended meaning of a piece of literature or art, but also makes it more accessible, allowing greater and deeper interaction from the public?
    Well, I think that in communication the purpose is to transmit the message, so that reciever understands it just as sender intends (s)he will understand it. If there are some secondary meanings sender is not aware reciever could misinterpret the message. So in my opinion more explicit communication is more effective it is. Valuable is wrong word, but I hope languages in the future evolve into more explicit direction so they'd fulfill their function as tool of communication more effectively.
    This is why I love mathematics, there is no place for misinterpretation. If my answer is wrong there is a reason why.

    Definition of art is a tough one, but in context of this and previous messages I sent I define it as creative piece of work with no other purpose than for one to express themselves and possibly bring jos to those who consume it, be it writing, painting/drawing, statue, piece of music.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Puddles the Monkey)
    Not just historically; scientists apply philosophy of science every time they run an experiment, or analyse results.
    See, IMO, today, that is just "doing science".

    You're right that the every day scientist in the lab probably doesn't have a deep understanding of and/or study of philosophy - they just follow the rules - and that's a real shame I think.Either way they're still learning the philosophy at some point.

    There are modern scientists studying and writing new philosophies of science. I don't know enough about this to give you a proper answer though. I'd have to go away and do some reading.
    Yes, I can see how that could be very interesting for some fields of physics (since other people were discussing that).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    But physics is applied analytical philosophy. To be honest we should go back to calling it Natural Philosophy. Sounds cooler

    The interpretation of quantum mechanics is a good example of philosophy and physics. There are different interpretations you can choose, all of which are equally valid empirically speaking. They all match up to experiment.
    Which interpretations do you favour?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    A basic understanding of Politics (though I guess this could count as social science) is imperative. People need to understand how their country is run and how they can have a voice

    I would also say History. Two cheesy but true quotes :p:

    “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.”

    'If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. '
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    Well, I think that in communication the purpose is to transmit the message, so that reciever understands it just as sender intends (s)he will understand it. If there are some secondary meanings sender is not aware reciever could misinterpret the message. So in my opinion more explicit communication is more effective it is. Valuable is wrong word, but I hope languages in the future evolve into more explicit direction so they'd fulfill their function as tool of communication more effectively.
    This is why I love mathematics, there is no place for misinterpretation. If my answer is wrong there is a reason why.

    Definition of art is a tough one, but in context of this and previous messages I sent I define it as creative piece of work with no other purpose than for one to express themselves and possibly bring jos to those who consume it, be it writing, painting/drawing, statue, piece of music.
    You succinct and concise clarity of thought and meaning is precisely the purpose of analytic philosophy and it has been the cause of a massive debate about language within philosophy for the last 100 or so years. Analytic philosophers love objective, clear cut, simple to understand, answers that you hard in the face. Not wishy-washy rubbish that can be interpreted 16 different ways and is essentially meaningless - that would be continental philosophy...

    You may very well enjoy analytic philosophy. I would recommend looking into it :P
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.