0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
That is a wide variety of subjects (Microbiology --> communication protocols).
That seems to be treating philosophy as if it is just like a science subject.
It's got just as much in common with Humanities and even purely Arts subjects.
Using words with precise and consistent definitions can then be less important than selecting words that convey meaning, stirs emotional response and provokes the reader to question something they have felt and might actually be impossible to put into words.
I didn't sit the final exam and have no formal qualification in Philosophy
Philosophy should be the basis of our biggest and most influential decisions.
it's an exam where there are no wrong answers!
It has been noted that if you recursively trace the first significant word in a Wikipedia article back to its Wikipedia article, you get back to the Wikipedia entry on Philosophy (in about 95% of cases).
what do you mean by "significant"...?
Clicking on the first link in the main text of an English Wikipedia article, and then repeating the process for subsequent articles, used to usually lead to the Philosophy article. In February 2016, this was true for 97% of all articles in Wikipedia
...the march of pseudoscience appears unstoppable...
I'm not a fan of Pseudoscience either but I'm going to take the other side for a moment, or at least advocate for proper balance.
It turns out that it can bring a very good income