‘philosophy, mathematics and science’ is a better fit than ‘logic and science’
I don’t agree. You want to teach philosophy as rationality? There are a great deal of different philosophies, which one will you teach? Or you’ll teach history of philosophy? Or meta-philosophy (which very quickly becomes yet-another-philosophy-in-the-long-list-of-those-which-tried-to-be-meta)?
And I really don’t see what math has to do with this at all. If anything, statistics is going to be more useful than math because statistics is basically a toolbox for dealing with uncertainty and that’s the really important part.
Philosophy includes epistemology, which is kind of important to epistemic ratioanlity.
Various philosophies include different approaches to epistemology. Which one do you want to teach?
I agree that philosophy can be a toolbox, but so can pretty much any field of human study—from physics to literary criticism. And here we’re talking about teaching rationality, not about the virtues of a comprehensive education.
I don’t agree. You want to teach philosophy as rationality? There are a great deal of different philosophies, which one will you teach? Or you’ll teach history of philosophy? Or meta-philosophy (which very quickly becomes yet-another-philosophy-in-the-long-list-of-those-which-tried-to-be-meta)?
And I really don’t see what math has to do with this at all. If anything, statistics is going to be more useful than math because statistics is basically a toolbox for dealing with uncertainty and that’s the really important part.
Philosophy includes epistemology, which is kind of important to epistemic ratioanlity.
Philosophy is a toolbox as well as a set of doctrines.
Various philosophies include different approaches to epistemology. Which one do you want to teach?
I agree that philosophy can be a toolbox, but so can pretty much any field of human study—from physics to literary criticism. And here we’re talking about teaching rationality, not about the virtues of a comprehensive education.