WWAWD Hierarchy of Subjects/Sciences

[CuckQueen]

Between mathematics and biology I'm not too sure of the ranking. Tentatively I have:

Logic
Mathematics
Physics
Chemistry
Astronomy
Meteorology
Geology
Biology

But I'm very unsure. Should astronomy be above chemistry, or even physics? Would you swap the places of Geology and Meteorology? I know I did several times already.

 

[guest]

Meteorology should not be before Biology...what good is it to master weather forecasting when you got no flocks or crops to tend to or the know how? Otherwise a solid hierarchy.

 

[guest]

Not to sound like Opie, but I really believe Water is so critical an essence to this realm it deserves its own Category, maybe right above Astronomy and below Chemistry (which on its own, is a sufficient/useful tool to define water and its components...but beyond the chemical aspect, Water is fawkin something ain't it? Like what is it? )

 

[CuckQueen]

Meteorology should not be before Biology...what good is it to master weather forecasting when you got no flocks or crops to tend to or the know how? Otherwise a solid hierarchy.

Yeah, that was my hang up too. On one hand I thought of going from the largest size and most universal to smallest and most localized. So zooming into the universe from the biggest picture of pure logic and math, to stars for astronomy, physics and chemistry, to planet scale, and zooming in on a planet you'd first pierce the atmosphere, hence meteorology being above biology in my ranking, simply because the clouds are above life physically. But this is my whole dilemma and am glad you bring it up. After all, the cause of oxygen in the atmosphere is a result of biological processes, but geology, the planet, mus exist before life, hence my confusion.

I want to put:
Geology
Biology
Meteorology

But I'd also like to continue from biology to more human matters, and putting meteorology after fucks that up.

Biology
Anthropology
Psychology
Sociology.

 

[CuckQueen]

Not to sound like Opie, but I really believe Water is so critical an essence to this realm it deserves its own Category, maybe right above Astronomy and below Chemistry (which on its own, is a sufficient/useful tool to define water and its components...but beyond the chemical aspect, Water is fawkin something ain't it? Like what is it? )

Oceanography might deserve it's own heading, but I imagine within other subjects some things are nestled. So biology would span microbiology, virology, bacteriology, botany, mycology, zoology, and within them their own branches, like zoology divided into mammalogy, primatology, etc. Fluid dynamics would then get tucked into physics, along with optics, acoustics and such.

 

[CuckQueen]

Not to sound like Opie, but I really believe Water is so critical an essence to this realm it deserves its own Category, maybe right above Astronomy and below Chemistry (which on its own, is a sufficient/useful tool to define water and its components...but beyond the chemical aspect, Water is fawkin something ain't it? Like what is it? )

Water is truly one of those things the higher you get in science you're more impressed by, like light or time.

 

[guest]

I hate when people talk about smart shit I feel like a real DUNCE

 

[CuckQueen]

I hate when people talk about smart shit I feel like a real DUNCE

If it's any consolation, my tummy hurts.

 

[Brooke Shields]

 

[CuckQueen]

View attachment 49523

That's covered in zoology.

 

[Ladynyahh]

Where we at with Mr. Wizard

 

['THE NIGGER MAN']

Alright big brainded smarty art nigga, the fuck is Logic and why is it first?

If one obtained a degree in Logic what would it be named? Logicology?

 

[fenrir]

Where we at with Mr. Wizard

I loved watching him when I was kid. Just a no-nonsense white man droppin' science.

Fuck Bill Nye (Beakman's cool tho).

 

[CuckQueen]

Alright big brainded smarty art nigga, the fuck is Logic and why is it first?

If one obtained a degree in Logic what would it be named? Logicology?

Well, maybe it would be easier for me to demonstrate. Do you own a doghouse?

I'd put logic on top because it can exist apriori. Of course, the argument for this is philosophical, so my true hierarchy is more wheel-like, so that while we may say logic is that beginning and philosophy at the end, the order could be reversed in getting from one to the other.

 

['THE NIGGER MAN']

Well, maybe it would be easier for me to demonstrate. Do you own a doghouse?

I'd put logic on top because it can exist apriori. Of course, the argument for this is philosophical, so my true hierarchy is more wheel-like, so that while we may say logic is that beginning and philosophy at the end, the order could be reversed in getting from one to the other.

This is illogical. Logic cannot exist without application.

 

[CuckQueen]

This is illogical. Logic cannot exist without application.

Logic must exist free of application, as the application in the natural world seems to break down all the time, with empiricism beating the dogshit out of rationalism. If logic did not exist free of application we would not get consistent logics that are different, like those of Ancient India and Ancient Greece. No system of mathematics can be totally logically consistent without some axioms, so logic must sit higher than mathematics. Logic can also be seen as an end or a start in this wheel of sciences, as when you come to the end at philosophy that alone will explain why logic works.

 

[Opie Army]

Where does psychology fit into that?

 

['THE NIGGER MAN']

Logic must exist free of application, as the application in the natural world seems to break down all the time, with empiricism beating the dogshit out of rationalism. If logic did not exist free of application we would not get consistent logics that are different, like those of Ancient India and Ancient Greece. No system of mathematics can be totally logically consistent without some axioms, so logic must sit higher than mathematics. Logic can also be seen as an end or a start in this wheel of sciences, as when you come to the end at philosophy that alone will explain why logic works.

Logic isn't a stand alone fruit. Logic is mastery of an X.

A Subject Matter Expert - let's use liTeraTure as an example. An accomplished author, Will TaTe for example, crafts his work methodically, using his prior learning experiences to create higher quality liTeraTure.

A fucking retard like Patrick S Tomlinson will never develop the logic necessary to produce anything other than embarrassing bunk.

Use of logic is a function of intelligence, however even most intelligent people are SME's in very narrow areas.

To me, this means that Logic is not something that exists in a vacuum, that mastery of X develops the underlying flow chart of experiences and gut instincts. Its the easy familiarity with a niche X that gives the appearance of Logic, but it is merely mastery of that X.

The ancient Greek guys were high on their own farts because they were SMEs of debate, and projected their debating Logic further than their grasp of other Xs.

 

[CuckQueen]

Logic isn't a stand alone fruit. Logic is mastery of an X.

A Subject Matter Expert - let's use liTeraTure as an example. An accomplished author, Will TaTe for example, crafts his work methodically, using his prior learning experiences to create higher quality liTeraTure.

A fucking retard like Patrick S Tomlinson will never develop the logic necessary to produce anything other than embarrassing bunk.

Use of logic is a function of intelligence, however even most intelligent people are SME's in very narrow areas.

To me, this means that Logic is not something that exists in a vacuum, that mastery of X develops the underlying flow chart of experiences and gut instincts. Its the easy familiarity with a niche X that gives the appearance of Logic, but it is merely mastery of that X.

The ancient Greek guys were high on their own farts because they were SMEs of debate, and projected their debating Logic further than their grasp of other Xs.

I think we vaguely agree that logic on its own is insufficient. One reason is lack of axioms that are true, the other you point out, and which I think is greater, is the failure to actually reason logically. To get to 1+1=2 in Principia Mathematica required pages upon pages of symbolic logic. If that is the case for such a simple fact, certainly logic is too complex for most applications.

 

[aRTie02150]

Not to sound like Opie, but I really believe Water is so critical an essence to this realm it deserves its own Category, maybe right above Astronomy and below Chemistry (which on its own, is a sufficient/useful tool to define water and its components...but beyond the chemical aspect, Water is fawkin something ain't it? Like what is it? )

Water is nuts. We drink it, we cook with it, we travel on it, we swim in it, it powers cities, our planet is mostly made from it, and so are we.