peter m asked in Arts & HumanitiesPhilosophy · 4 weeks ago

Can we Programme Philosophy for the future? Like computers are programmed?

Update:

If we can.. would this make Philosophy easier?

Update 2:

Easier-in-an interesting way, with an impetus.

Update 3:

So here we should say an impetus.. & a humanly interesting one where the Growth of philosophy knowledge is tied-ever-closer to that of general knowledge. For example why we can learn from environment, general philosophy mistakes like that of a damaged & damaging physical world - a wake-up-call for our forward looking philosophy "programmed" or not.

4 Answers

Relevance
  • Best answer

    I once had a volunteer job for a website, on which I worked with programming chatbots that were all deceased philosophers. The site went under, and so all my work was lost. It is possible, not only to program philosophy bots, but also make them animated, and lively, in a virtual game or computer based learning platform. I think it would make learning philosophy easier, and in an interesting way. Good question, Pete.

  • 4 weeks ago

    I think that the answer to this Question is "yes" as Full Spectrum (hereafter FS) 's experience. 

    But kundalini is also correct, likely showing say FS's virtual animated teaching/learning platform to be something really simplified with a philosophical background as Unchanging-As-something-Like Wikipedia for example. And there are of course an Infinity of such definitive Tomes.. some of which will usually be at the higher & at the lower end-of-the philosophy merit scale.

    And it can be shown, learned or taught that the difference between the upper & lower scale points on such a merit scale would & I'd argue still be the difference between some truth & some fake info, that is in philosophy the difference between objective truth & some made-up, arbitrary subjective cover.

    Too much "qualitative philosophy programming" would, like the timespan necessary to teach faithfully such a programme, generate more & more Questions - & questions which would not ideally distinguish between philosophy objectivity & imaginative fake news stories. And it could even be that mathematics takes prime position as the best programme of philosophy.. yet even this programme mode would have to be closely aligned to its host, philosophy say from a reasonable past or even a reasonable future (then supposing that this MAY BE an outcome for a future programmed philosophy based around solving the current Environment Emergency et al). For as I have insisted & have spent months or more trying to show.. objective type Philosophy Must Have an AIM as well as an (It's) accompanying method. A sort-of-red-delineating-line for the philosophy's future production OF QUESTIONS as well as of the (it's) previously adequate Problem-answers..

    So I think that some small experimentation a la FS's answer is likely and whether short lived or not just like the present "Philosophy for Dummies" set books a screen version could be both popular AND informative, impetus wise.

    I also want to go further & say that  such a series of virtual philosophy programmes could likely be very much in line with what looks to be happening along present "environment philosophy lines". For although the Greta Thunberg sensation -if I may call it that- her calling recently of an "Emergency" as in an-emergency-environmental-problem-situation has happened in a random almost haphazard way.. nonetheless I believe that rationally & situation-ally (time sensitive to the environment problem) it has ONLY BEEN A MATTER OF TIME before someone like Greta forced-the-issue.

    By "forcing the issue" I mean taking the High road so to speak morally against the Inactive-or-not, leaders responsible (for the inaction).

    What characterises such figureheads are that they are older people - generally & rather EXCLUSIVELY so compared to the young people now getting involved.

    And so I think a definite split along those lines... lines of younger citizens using their OWN UNIQUE SITUATION within history so to speak as a working Environment barrier to use against a failing-barrier of sorts which each OLDER GENERATION must be responsible for.

    So why & what problem would such a description be of use ?

    As well as the environmental one (where the idea is to map on going progress against up-to-date present results, to keep-the-pressure-on even if that means doing too little in some areas unaccounted for..) there is a moral philosophy problem of who-&-what should be in-charge & leading-the-way out of the present environmental morass..

    who-&-what meaning here what type of world do we choose (in a short/ medium future?) & who decides JUST HOW good OR Reasonable are the expectations (in a foreseeable future). Who decides?

    It's easy to see that Greta & her generation may be open to such a PHILOSOPHICAL proposition... although we can understand too just what & why an older Generation may think about that.

    Something more for a so called programmed philosophy learning situation of an Environmental kind.. of a generation who while not having the time now of being able to interact more completely with their elder counterparts, must find solutions which help both young & old in a world which could either be seen as "failing" or be seen as "succeeding" in an Environmental way.            

  • 4 weeks ago

    great question!

    no! The philosophy of the future is to break limits. And the programs restricted them

    Why is there a contradiction?

    To solve the contradiction philosophy will always be more powerful than computers.

    and if only the philosophy will be mathematics

    What is the contradiction of all this, because many will come out there?

  • 4 weeks ago

    No, but thank you for giving us your dope-smoking attention at this hour of the day. We realize you have a lot of cartoons to choose from, but you chose us.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.