Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mohan.C I speak time as linear because I believe in the universe to be open and continuous. I am not saying axioms change they are static. I meant that the logic operating on the effects from a cause is an Axiom. Because I thought logic is based on axioms. However when you say my philosophy of events ignores "subjects and entities acting and interacting". I believe these come under the consideration of science and not of philosophy. But, I may be wrong. And since philosophy has not yet had the full freedom to accomodate science there is still much to wonder at. |
I didn't say that you said that axioms change. But axioms do change anyway, specially to face the strongest problems; logical axioms in particular have had to been change several times, due to russell's paradox, or godel's theorem, or Hilbert's work...
Logic is not a god that you must worship. That is one of the most basic lessons from Russell's philosophy (which is far more interesting than his mathematics). He said that whiles he was an adolescent he was msot interested by religion and by math. So he decided to be religious with math, and mathematical with religion. That is why he became such a strong atheist and lost his 'faith' in logic.
'Subjects and entities acting and interacting' is a philosophical sentence that rises from those four terms which are in fact rooted to philosophy. Both science and philosophy are about the external and the internal, the difference is that science deals with subjects (which are subjects as subjective) and philosophy deals with entities (which are subjects as objective). So the sentence includes both.
Science will never give us the 'ultimate truth' in which it makes us believe. Philosophers invented science in order to falsify, to go the easy way. It isn't bad, I'm not a cultural judge, but it isn't as definitive as you think.