The difference between our beliefs is that I see philosophy as a superset of science. Just because “what is human value?” starts mapping to science doesn’t mean it stops being philosophy.
I wasn’t referring to historical philosophy. I was referring to the specific hard problems I listed, namely “what is human value?” which even though it decomposes to being a problem of science, still has much more of the philosophy problem nature than the science problem nature.
Anyways this is a disagreement about the meaning of words only.
Whether you call a problem like “what is human value?” a science problem or a philosophy problem, it is still an important unsolved problem that via concerted effort we have a very real chance at solving.
The difference between our beliefs is that I see philosophy as a superset of science. Just because “what is human value?” starts mapping to science doesn’t mean it stops being philosophy.
I wasn’t referring to historical philosophy. I was referring to the specific hard problems I listed, namely “what is human value?” which even though it decomposes to being a problem of science, still has much more of the philosophy problem nature than the science problem nature.
Anyways this is a disagreement about the meaning of words only.
Whether you call a problem like “what is human value?” a science problem or a philosophy problem, it is still an important unsolved problem that via concerted effort we have a very real chance at solving.