Discussion of the Value of Philosophy

"The Science Guy" dismissing philosophy: Philosophy is dismissed by various scientists who, however, do not really study philosophy and who thus also do not really understand what philosophy is about.



Does he have the qualification to talk about the subject? 

- "studied mechanical engineering at Cornell University"
- "took an astronomy class taught by Carl Sagan^[10]" 
- "graduated with a B.S. in mechanical engineering in 1977.^[11]"

- "began his career in Seattle at Boeing, where, among other things, he starred in training films and developed a hydraulic pressure resonance suppressor for the 747" [Whatever that might mean] 
- "early 2000s" "development of a small sundial that was included in the Mars Exploration Rovermissions.^[3]"
- "From 2005 to 2010 [...] vice president of The Planetary Society, an organization that advocatesspace science research and the exploration of other planets, particularly Mars.^[35]"  [... in 2010] second Executive Director

- "a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, a U.S. non-profit scientific and educational organization whose aim is to promote scientific inquiry, critical investigation, and the use of reason in examining controversial and extraordinary claims.^[47]"

AND THIS IS PHILOSOPHY; quote Wikipedia:

"Skepticism or scepticism (see spelling differences) is generally any questioning attitude or doubt towards one or more items of putative knowledge or belief.^[1][2] It is often directed at domains, such as morality (moral skepticism), religion (skepticism about the existence of God), or the nature of knowledge (skepticism of knowledge).^[3] Formally, skepticism as a topic arises in the context of philosophy, particularly epistemology, although it has also found its way into popular-level social and political issues like climate science, religion, pseudoscience."

I emphasize his "concern [... of] scientific illiteracy ... you [the public] don't have enough rudimentary knowledge of the universe to evaluate claims."^[48] , however, I claim that he also does not have the instruments to do so.

Which fallacy did I commit?




Ad Hominem Fallacy:

Ad Hominem Fallacy means to focus on the person, instead of discussing the argument.

Indications for counter-arguments:

- Philosophers have better GRE Scores (standardized test, necessary for admission into Graduate School)

Verbal Section: Students with the intent to study philosophy outperform their peers tremendously
Math Section: Solid results for students of philosophy, but it should be better
Analytical Writing: Again best results in this section

Source: http://www.physicscentral.com/buzz/blog/index.cfm?postid=5112019841346388353

Schoolkids get better: http://qz.com/635002/teaching-kids-philosophy-makes-them-smarter-in-math-and-english/?utm_source=qzfbarchive

Another standardized testing: https://www.mcneese.edu/f/c/4cf4656e/WSPAdmissionsPerformance.pdf

So what might be the motivation of other branches to dismiss philosophy?

1) They might not know what philosophy really is and are killing straw men.
2) They might see philosophy as the strongest competitor in giving a holistic interpretation of the world
3) They deny the basic methods of philosophy without being aware of their own methods.

Twitter response from Existential Comics

"Why does philosophy matter?"
"I don't know, why does science matter?"
"Well because scie-"
"Annnnnnnd you are doing philosophy."

— Existential Comics (@existentialcoms) August 5, 2015

Job Opportunities for Philosophers
Sciene Guy says that philosophy is not a good career path, here are some qualitative reports about philosophers in silicon valley: http://forbesindia.com/printcontent/40955. Philosophy is regarded as a complex subject that benefits major companies to address complex problems.


Main problem of my article (despite the sloppy quoting):

1) Sources should be better. Peer-reviewed analyses are the gold-standard for knowledge

2)  BIAS in selection, that means the author (I mean myself, but it sounds fancier to call myself an author, and like a person who is someone else) only searched for information that confirmed his viewpoint.

This is a psychological fallacy.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/03/upshot/a-quick-puzzle-to-test-your-problem-solving.html?WT.mc_id=2015-KWP-INTL_AUD_DEV&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=IntlAudDev&kwp_0=32100&kwp_4=199133&kwp_1=177269&_r=1&abt=0002&abg=0


Last and probably least - A trivial argument why you should choose philosophy:

Philosophers are the sexiest subjects (source: http://news.bitofnews.com/professors-in-these-subjects-are-most-likely-to-be-described-as-sexy/?utm_sourc=newsletter)