Philosophy and Science, by Danny Kemp

I want to start something that I cannot finish today but hope to build upon in the future.

Some people would argue that science and philosophy are worlds apart; science being the study of known facts whilst philosophy is purely a thought process based on assumptions and belief. I would suggest the two disciplines are the same.

Philosophy is the exploration and questioning of accepted facts. It is a branch of science of its own. It doesn’t need in a sterile laboratory as it functions within the brain. It’s a thought process examining knowledge and offering a different understanding. In a sense, it’s conceptual thought following logical lines.

Science is exactly the same. It examines logical facts. If one reasons logically, one is thinking scientifically. The human brain cannot exist outside of physics yet thought process is not confined to either a physical form or the science of physics.

Neither in science nor philosophy must there be belief, as belief is the acceptance of irrational thought, ie, all factual explanation is questionable, but without questioning facts science would have no role to fill, and philosophical thought would be only conjecture.

I argue that without philosophy science would not have evolved. Without an egg, there would be no chicken…..The unsolvable issue of what came first.

Through science and philosophy, man has examined his self-being in more ways than solely altruistically, developing a conscious awareness of character and motives. BUT…….

Self-awareness is conceptual in so far as humans are parallel beings, one the decision maker and the other the explorer. The decision maker follows logical, well thought out lines decided upon through influence or experience, whilst the explorer probes the unknown abstract world of the imaginary. Self, is by definition a single entity and, therefore, in my proposition, incapable of understanding subconscious thought!

The fundamental basis of life is discovery, whether that be through a specific scientific discipline or through the dissecting scalpel of thought!

 

Advertisements

About Danny Kemp

I was at work one sunny November day in 2006, stopped at a red traffic light when a van, driven incompetently, smashed into me. I was taken to St Thomas' Hospital and kept in for a while, but it was not only the physical injuries that I suffered from; it was also mental ones. I had lost confidence in myself let alone those around me. The experts said that I had post-traumatic stress disorder, which I thought only the military or emergency personnel suffered from. On good days, I attempted to go to work, sometimes I even made it through Blackwell Tunnel only to hear, or see, something that made me jump out of my skin and that's when the anxiety attacks would start. I told my wife that I was okay and going regularly, but I wasn't. I could not cope with life and thought about ending it. Somehow or other with the help of my wife and medical professionals, I managed to survive and ever so slowly rebuild my self-esteem. It took almost four years to fully recover, but it was during those dark depressive days that I began to write. My very first story, Look Both Ways, Then Look Behind, found a literary agent but not a publisher. He told me that I had a talent, raw, but nevertheless, it was there. His advice was to write another story and that I'm delighted to say, I did. The success of that debut novel, The Desolate Garden, was down to sheer hard work, luck, and of course, meeting a film producer.
This entry was posted in Author/Writer, Raconteur and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Philosophy and Science, by Danny Kemp

  1. A very interesting and informative article. Indeed both these disciplines are inter related and will progress up till the time man keeps on searching for answers.

  2. janetcate says:

    I found this very thought provoking. They are certainly related and we will always evolve because of our search for meaning and knowledge. I am possessed by this search.

  3. Danny Kemp says:

    Thank you both for reading it and taking the time and trouble to comment on it. As I said in the beginning I hope to post more thoughts on this subject.

  4. Fragt man sich in der Philosophie nicht „Was, wäre wenn …?“Und sagt die Wissenschaft nicht dazu „So und so ist es …!”

  5. If you ask in philosophy is not “What if …?” And science says not to “So and so it is …!”

  6. Danny Kemp says:

    Thank you for reading my post, Gabriele.

  7. Do you want more?
    Personally, I’ll take the true philosophy, among other things as playful. The issue is, but the results can be found in the uncertainty. In other words, and quite profane: Man spins a thread or multiple threads and looks at some point where the ball of yarn rolls and roll the balls of. Is philosophy not vary the possibilities (play with options), the discovery by the treading of different ways without having previously targeted a specific goal, because it was not plugged in? So you therefore explored several ways, the beginning you can certainly be the target has not been fixed, much is it to see.

    Science is not from the outset focused basically their structure? Is in science, such. As medicine not a foregone conclusion, where has a way to lead? What should be explored? The way to achieve a result in this case will be more. The beginning of these pathways has also been defined, but the goal is already known in most cases. It conducts research for a cure for a disease such. B. The goal is plugged in, the way there is uncertain, there are many ways of exploring and at the end you can see the medication. Of course, we must take into account that many discoveries have been made by chance, not only in medicine. But well before their research had most scientists a specific goal in mind.

    Science must be reproducible and verifiable to 100%.
    The philosophy moves to the inclusion of a thread or threads in a free space whose boundaries were not inserted.

    Wollen Sie noch mehr?
    Ich persönlich nehme die Philosophie unter anderem auch als spielerisch wahr. Das Thema steht, doch das Ergebnis ist in der Ungewissheit zu finden. Anders und ganz profan ausgedrückt: Man spinnt einen Faden oder mehrere Fäden und sieht irgendwann, wohin das Wollknäuel rollt, bzw. die Knäule rollen. Ist Philosophie nicht auch das variieren von Möglichkeiten (spielen mit Möglichkeiten), das Entdecken durch das Beschreiten verschiedener Wege, ohne vorher ein bestimmtes Ziel anvisiert zu haben, weil es nicht gesteckt wurde? Man erkundet demnach also mehrere Wege, deren Anfang man sich gewiss sein kann, deren Ziel nicht fixiert wurde, geschweige denn zu sehen ist.

    Ist Wissenschaft nicht von vorneherein zielgerichtet im Grunde ihrer Struktur? Steht in der Wissenschaft, z. B. in der Medizin nicht von vornherein fest, wohin ein Weg zu führen hat? Was erforscht werden soll? Die Wege bis zu einem Ergebnis werden in diesem Fall auch mehrere sein. Der Anfang dieser Wege wurde ebenfalls markiert, doch das Ziel ist in den meisten Fällen schon bekannt. Man forscht nach einem Heilmittel für eine Krankheit, z. B. Das Ziel ist gesteckt, der Weg dorthin liegt im Ungewissen, es werden viele Wege erkundet und am Ende sieht man das Medikament. Natürlich müssen wir berücksichtigen, dass viele Entdeckungen durch Zufall gemacht wurden, nicht nur in der Medizin. Doch hatten wohl die meisten Wissenschaftler vor ihren Forschungen ein bestimmtes Ziel vor Augen.

    Wissenschaft muss zu 100 % reproduzierbar und belegbar sein.
    Die Philosophie bewegt sich nach Aufnahme eines Faden oder der Fäden in einem freien Raum, dessen Grenzen nicht gesteckt wurden.

  8. Danny Kemp says:

    Thank you for that, Gabriele.

  9. Pingback: Philosophy and Science, by Danny Kemp | ldbush21

  10. Robynn Gabel says:

    To be self-aware is also to be able to discipline one’s self. Unfortunately, it takes works. To bad more people are not self aware that their actions have a ripple effect, like a pebble tossed into a pool. Excellent look into the soul!

  11. Danny Kemp says:

    Thank you for reading my confused thoughts, Robynn.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s