Unfortunately, the history of philosophy has been riddled with morality arguements presented as "ethics." Plato's exploration of the question: "what is the good life?" is drenched with pederasty, slavery, and the art of sounding smart without actually having any examples to refer to. This problem occurs with almost every academic philosopher. For example, Descartes invents a God that necessarily exist, but only serves as a receptical for empty concepts like perfection, essential substance, and extention. Leibniz invents the term "monads" to attempt to explain the perception of space, but this term still lacks any actual reference. And Heidegger, well... he swore his allegence to Adolf Hitler and wrote a ton of psychobabble for a whole generation of pseudo-existential fascists. The problems concerning philosophy is that to the untrained ear, it's hard to distinguish it from sophistry. Seneca (4 BC-66 AD) defined philosophy as the "love of wisdom." His writing were concerned only with confronting the very real phases and transitions of human experience (growing up, being responsible, actualizing one's potential, raising children, friendship, and facing death). He was concerned with the ethical approach to such things, and railed against the sophists for making a mockery of and devaluing life and the individual experience of it. He was also very critical of death revelling and the sophists obsession with tragedy. I think the only concern philosophy should have with CS is in the ethical application of it. I would say that true philosophers would say that the only ethical application of CS is open sourcing. By allowing individuals and corporations to hold patents and lisences, the government maintains a stranglehold on the entire industry, and I have yet to see the government employ anything with good intentions. To insure the safety of people everywhere, all CS and R&D in any scientific or technological field should remain in full public view. The private sector has little concern for the common good, and that needs to be the concern of all philosophers.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, the history of philosophy has been riddled with morality arguements presented as "ethics." Plato's exploration of the question: "what is the good life?" is drenched with pederasty, slavery, and the art of sounding smart without actually having any examples to refer to. This problem occurs with almost every academic philosopher. For example, Descartes invents a God that necessarily exist, but only serves as a receptical for empty concepts like perfection, essential substance, and extention. Leibniz invents the term "monads" to attempt to explain the perception of space, but this term still lacks any actual reference. And Heidegger, well... he swore his allegence to Adolf Hitler and wrote a ton of psychobabble for a whole generation of pseudo-existential fascists. The problems concerning philosophy is that to the untrained ear, it's hard to distinguish it from sophistry. Seneca (4 BC-66 AD) defined philosophy as the "love of wisdom." His writing were concerned only with confronting the very real phases and transitions of human experience (growing up, being responsible, actualizing one's potential, raising children, friendship, and facing death). He was concerned with the ethical approach to such things, and railed against the sophists for making a mockery of and devaluing life and the individual experience of it. He was also very critical of death revelling and the sophists obsession with tragedy. I think the only concern philosophy should have with CS is in the ethical application of it. I would say that true philosophers would say that the only ethical application of CS is open sourcing. By allowing individuals and corporations to hold patents and lisences, the government maintains a stranglehold on the entire industry, and I have yet to see the government employ anything with good intentions. To insure the safety of people everywhere, all CS and R&D in any scientific or technological field should remain in full public view. The private sector has little concern for the common good, and that needs to be the concern of all philosophers.