I do appreciate you providing some relevant information instead of just telling everyone else they're wrong. You still haven't put any of your own ideas on the line though. Is there an approach you believe is correct, and why?
Here's one of mine so I play by my own rules: philosophical questions don't have any testable hypothesis by nature, they'd be scientific questions if they did. The goal is to massage the question into an answerable one if you can. It's not really possible to have a "wrong" answer if the question is unknowable or malformed.
I could have made the original post with less melodrama but I like to snub philosophers when they swoop in like they have answers to these questions. Either it's a matter of science or you don't have answers, just perspectives.
> I do appreciate you providing some relevant information instead of just telling everyone else they're wrong. You still haven't put any of your own ideas on the line though. Is there an approach you believe is correct, and why?
I think a form of logicism (the view that mathematical statements are logical tautologies in disguise) is true at least for arithmetic. There are some ways to interpret them using logical truths from pure higher-order logic. I'm not sure about most other parts of mathematics.
> Here's one of mine so I play by my own rules: philosophical questions don't have any testable hypothesis by nature
I think they are testable by performing conceptual analysis, which consists in organizing data from semantic intuitions about the involved concepts.
If you'd like to ponder this question and more, please sign up for a course called "Philosophy of Science". It won't help answer it, but it's easy marks.
Here's one of mine so I play by my own rules: philosophical questions don't have any testable hypothesis by nature, they'd be scientific questions if they did. The goal is to massage the question into an answerable one if you can. It's not really possible to have a "wrong" answer if the question is unknowable or malformed.
I could have made the original post with less melodrama but I like to snub philosophers when they swoop in like they have answers to these questions. Either it's a matter of science or you don't have answers, just perspectives.