But if philosophers should measure what is scientific and what is not, to whom or to what should philosophers be held accountable to when they suggest an idea?
Alexander Philip Bird
From my perspective, philosophers (or poets) are not qualify to measure anything in 2021 (unless you want the same measurement to give two different results). The act of even attempting to gain the title of Philosopher or Poet is, in my opinion, a form of accountability to a life of questioning, doubting, and experiencing endless imperfection in a cloud of subjective and objective propositions.
Scientists search for scientific-knowledge while philosophers/poets live this knowledge tearing through it with life-experiences and thought-experiments because human knowledge is frail, partial, temporary and full of rabbit-holes.
My view is that scientists arrive at the end…
…s at least claim to either embrace or reject the messages with which they are constantly assaulted. The underlying assumption is that there is, in some measure, an ability to affect behavior. The intricacies of how this is accomplished, however, remain somewhat of an enigma, as is exemplified by the famous quote, “Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the troubl…
Donna L Roberts, PhD (Psych Pstuff)
Beyond the "assumption," there's competition among the Producers. Keeping the product fresh on the consumer's mind is a Win by itself.
There's a bigger question. Should this type of manipulation be permitted? Can there ever be a person/group with the power/knowledge to affect behavior conclusively? Such person/group could implant the seed of thoughts into the masses and direct (within a acceptable statistical range) people toward a Product or patterns-of-emotions with known results. Imagine if such world existed. If such things were possible and done for profit, national cohesion, or other more subversive interests. Would calling it “War” justify any such actions and/or countermeasures?
Interesting exposition, Donna. Lots to think about here. Thank you.
I don't think anyone knows someone else (even ourselves) with certainty. We can have faiths, laws, mores, virtues, beliefs, and manipulative-structures to bring order and a sense of purpose to any given version of human perspective or logic. Failing this, we default to primal emotions and genetic inclinations.
I do acknowledge Zsa Zsa’s ability to see behind the veil and to humble male-dominance in an entertaining “clever” manner. It might be that in Laughter, we find a way to forgive ourselves and humanity.
Dreaming a poet’s life with every sigh