this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
287 points (98.3% liked)

Science Memes

16258 readers
2515 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Philosophy > science

Fight me

[–] explodIng_lIme@lemmy.world 37 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Science is philosophy. Somewhere along the way people seem to have forgotten that

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Here's a fun game:

Pick any Wikipedia article. Click the first link. Keep clicking the first link. Eventually you'll end up at Philosophy and forever be in a loop going back to Philosophy.

Turns out conscious thinking and applying logical rigor is the basis for everything we perceive.

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

I found an exception:

Starting from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English: Help:IPA/English > Alphabet > Letter (alphabet) > Symbol > Sign (semiotics) > Semiotics > Help:IPA/English

If you don't think the IPA link counts as "the first link", then

Starting from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language: Japanese language > Japonic languages > Japanese language

will also cause a loop.

[–] veniasilente@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Help: namespace is not articles tho.

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

If you don't count link that leads to help, then Japanese language will lead to a loop of only 2 clicks.

See the original post.

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Excellent! Well played.

[–] deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago

wouldn't count that stuff in the parenthesis, as it's just showing the translation of "japonic lanuages" and then the transliteration of that translation. Sometimes they'll have pronunciation or whatever in parentheses, and that shouldn't count for the same reason.

If instead of clicking on "japanese" again, you had clicked on "language family", you'd get all the way to philosophy in 8 or 9 clicks (i lost count and i'm too lazy to fix it).

[–] Wodge@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Started off at the page for Ham, and yep, it ended up on philosophy.

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Apparently, there is a wikipedia article about this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Getting_to_Philosophy

I really wish this article wouldn't link to philosophy, but it does...

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If this is true, then every wikipedia page will eventually lead to wikipedia of Greek, because the philosophy page leads to greek.

Hence, Greek best country confirmed by wikipedia?!

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You know what I mean, brother. There's a huge scope of difference between applied sciences and natural philosophy. Our technological advancements fail to resolve fundamental questions about the human condition. Scientists rarely study epistemology or philosophy in order to attain our degrees and I think it shows in the public trend toward scientism.

[–] Grail@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Scientism is so pervasive and so ridiculous. For example there's people who say magic isn't real because science can explain it. No shit science can explain it, that's the point of science. It's people defining science in opposition to magic based on cultural values instead of actually knowing what science is. https://medium.com/@viridiangrail/tautological-denial-of-magic-0e311ca94c2a

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 2 points 2 years ago

Interesting read. I'm familiar with the Arthur C Clarke quote...

[–] fsxylo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Lol, I love when the woo community can't argue in good faith, so have to artificially drag science to their level by calling it "scientism".

Magic isn't real because you can't prove it's real, and science isn't opposed to magic, because magic isn't on the playing board.

[–] Grail@aussie.zone -2 points 2 years ago

I'm a degree-holding job-working scientist and I love science. I also love magic. Magic can be proven. Scientists have published hundreds of papers on the powerful placebo effect, also known as magic. Don't tell me you're going to deny the existence of the placebo effect?