[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

That's history, politics and engineering, not philosophy. Philosophy is all about insisting that everyone else is wrong.

Maybe that's your philosophy. But someone else's philosophy might be different.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Piers Morgan Supports Killing Children & Women, No Kidding!

[alancalverd]

Piers Morgan Supports......

Which is usually a very good reason for not doing it, whatever it may be.

[alancalverd]

But some else's philosophy might be different.

If a philosopher admits that someone else is right, his career is ended. If an academic wrote  "In my considered opinion, Maimonides/Hegel/Schopenhauer explained everything completely, so just read his book", who would give him another research grant?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

If a philosopher admits that someone else is right, his career is ended.

Not necessarily. There are some examples of philosophers who publicly changed their mind, and explained their reasons.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

If an academic wrote  "In my considered opinion, Maimonides/Hegel/Schopenhauer explained everything completely, so just read his book", who would give him another research grant?

They haven't explained everything completely. Philosophers need to provide a fundamental framework that can be used by Super Intelligent Entities which are smarter than all human intelligence combined to make their decisions and plan their actions.

[alancalverd]

So far, philosophers have produced religions and political philosophies, none of which has benefitted anyone but parasites. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

So far, philosophers have produced religions and political philosophies, none of which has benefitted anyone but parasites. 

Maybe you can help them identify their mistakes, and show a way to prevent them from making the same mistakes in the future.

[alancalverd]

Easy. Forget about philosophy. Get a productive job and be nice to people.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Easy. Forget about philosophy. Get a productive job and be nice to people.

Doing philosophy is not limited to earning money. It's about how to reason and process information. How to select and accept justified information and reliable sources. Reject falsified information.

Philosophy is the study of fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. It involves thinking deeply and critically about topics that don't always have clear answers.

Philosophy encourages critical thinking, questioning assumptions, and seeking understanding beyond the surface.
ChatGPT

[alancalverd]

Rejecting falsified information is the business of science.  Can you name a modern philosopher who doesn't do it for money?

Chat GPT produces garbage as usual.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Rejecting falsified information is the business of science.  Can you name a modern philosopher who doesn't do it for money?

Chat GPT produces garbage as usual.

Earning money is not inherently immoral. Unless if doing so prevent someone else from doing the necessary things for the society.

I want to read you an email that I was asked to keep confidential because I think it explains some of my worries about academia.

I knew that physicists would go on to argue I should have tried to solve the problem internally (within the community) before drawing public attention to it. The reason I published this comment was so that I could later demonstrate that I did this. This is why it's a paywalled publication that you don't find on the arxiv.

[alancalverd]

I knew that physicists would go on to argue I should have tried to solve the problem internally (within the community) before drawing public attention to it.

Not this physicist. If the problem is significant, why treat the public with contempt?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Easy. Forget about philosophy. Get a productive job and be nice to people.

How do you determine if a job is productive?

[alancalverd]

If it feeds, clothes, or protects others.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

If it feeds, clothes, or protects others.

What do you think about entertainers? Are they productive?

The "others" should be more specific. Protecting criminals from justice is not productive, IMO.

[alancalverd]

Protecting criminals from justice is not productive, IMO.

Try telling that to the US Supreme Court.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Protecting criminals from justice is not productive, IMO.

Try telling that to the US Supreme Court.

It seems like they have different opinions. But what matters is whose opinions will be aligned with the future conscious entities.

[alancalverd]

Providing a professional legal defence for the accused is a worthwhile and productive activity, particularly where the alleged offence derives from a religious or political perversion. Harbouring a convicted criminal is an offence and not productive, except where the conviction arises from a religious or political motive.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

perversion

What makes a political decision derived from a perversion?