I used my philosophy of science classwork all the time in my engineering career.
What constitutes proof? What kinds of questions can you answer with data? When do we consider a pattern of behavior to represent the existence of some entity?
Being able to think about these kinds of questions with clarity is really helpful in diagnosing problems in large systems.
What constitutes proof? What kinds of questions can you answer with data? When do we consider a pattern of behavior to represent the existence of some entity?
Any recommended reading for someone who’s never formally studied philosophy?
Karl Popper, “The Logic of Scientific Discovery” is a seminal work in the modern philosophy of science. It proposes to solve the problem of induction, and his proposal of falsifiability is, to my knowledge, the most popular philosophical framework for modern scientific practice. I’d be interested in what the above commenter has to say about Popper, though, as I am not well-read outside of his work, as my focus is on the history of science.
I’ve worked with a few philosophy majors in various roles and they were more thoughtful about things. Like they learned how to think, not just what to think.
yes, though the facts and studies they link to remain true regardless - this is the strongest argument for getting a philosophy degree, it makes sense they present it
Don’t ya think this might be a bit bias? They have a vested interest to sell you a philosophy degree.
I used my philosophy of science classwork all the time in my engineering career.
What constitutes proof? What kinds of questions can you answer with data? When do we consider a pattern of behavior to represent the existence of some entity?
Being able to think about these kinds of questions with clarity is really helpful in diagnosing problems in large systems.
Statistical significance.
Any recommended reading for someone who’s never formally studied philosophy?
Karl Popper, “The Logic of Scientific Discovery” is a seminal work in the modern philosophy of science. It proposes to solve the problem of induction, and his proposal of falsifiability is, to my knowledge, the most popular philosophical framework for modern scientific practice. I’d be interested in what the above commenter has to say about Popper, though, as I am not well-read outside of his work, as my focus is on the history of science.
I’ve worked with a few philosophy majors in various roles and they were more thoughtful about things. Like they learned how to think, not just what to think.
yes, though the facts and studies they link to remain true regardless - this is the strongest argument for getting a philosophy degree, it makes sense they present it