The hierarchy of Science

Gizmo j

Senior member
Nov 9, 2013
912
248
116
Sociology can't exist without Psychology

Psychology can't exist without Biology

Biology can't exist without Chemistry

Chemistry can't exist without Physics

Physics can't exist without Math

Math>Physics>Chemistry>Biology>Psychology>Sociology
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
48,414
5,270
136
Action/consequence is the real foundation of the universe. Everything in the universe operates off this master principle; we just don't understand all of the action/consequence sets out there & chalk stuff up to magic or happenstance or whatever. And that's the difference between principles & practices: the principle is action/consequence; there are pretty much infinite practices of that principle in play. That master principle then slides into math, physics, chemistry, etc.

Which is imo why personal continuous education is so important. The more you know, the more power you have to do things to improve your life! Be more effective at your job, enjoy your experiences more, learn how to cook, get good at a hobby, get a better career, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sandorski

snoopy7548

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2005
8,061
5,057
146
Yeah, but how do you prove math is correct? A number is something people made up, therefore it's wrong.

But if you were to prove math correct, you would do it through engineering. Checkmate, plebs.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,516
8,103
136
Sociology can't exist without Psychology
Psychology can't exist without Biology
Biology can't exist without Chemistry
Chemistry can't exist without Physics
Physics can't exist without Math
Math>Physics>Chemistry>Biology>Psychology>Sociology
Interesting. I was fantastically good at chemistry. All these things fascinate me. I was equally great at physics as chemistry. I agree(d) that physics>chemistry, so it was my major at the U. But once in upper division physics became so abstract and divorced from sensory experience that I lost interest and changed to math. Ultimately I got my degree in math. Math > *
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,516
8,103
136
agreed

none of the others have provable correctness
You can prove a lot of things but not everything. For instance, and of utmost importance, is that some of the things you take for granted in all this provable stuff isn't provable.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,516
8,103
136
Math isn’t a science.
It's sort of an intellectual discipline. In large part it's an intellectual set of tools designed to solve real world problems. As such it's absolutely essential to modern civilization. There are areas of math that are outside practical application, but are nevertheless of interest. Mathematicians like to think of themselves as not thinking any of it superior. It's a heady realm.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Yeah, but how do you prove math is correct? A number is something people made up, therefore it's wrong.

But if you were to prove math correct, you would do it through engineering. Checkmate, plebs.

Mathematics is the language of the universe. If we ever met an alien civilization we would be able to communicate with them through mathematics. The symbols we use may be chosen by us but we can create a Rosetta Stone of we ever met an alien civilization.

Engineering is applied physics, and you can't have applied physics without mathematics.

Checkmate douche.
 
Last edited:

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,054
7,981
136
You can't reduce each of those to the one 'above' (or 'below') them. They are each applicable at their own level. Try explaining Trump's election solely in terms of fundamental equations of physics. Give us your full derivation, starting with, say, the underlying equations of string theory, and ending with '....therefore, Trump.'

Furthermore (as someone whose favourite subjects were always maths and physics) it sometimes seems to me it goes round in a loop, because sociology underlies all of them. It determines how all the other disciplines operate and what conclusions they come to. They are all, ultimately, sociological phenomena. Psychology, for example, strikes me as being largely a concequence of sociology. In my experience, psychologists believe what they do because it meets the socially-determined needs of the kind of people who become psychologists, not because it's true. That's why its record, both as a clinical practice and an academic discipline, is so bad!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muse
Nov 20, 2009
10,046
2,573
136
You can't reduce each of those to the one 'above' (or 'below') them. They are each applicable at their own level. Try explaining Trump's election solely in terms of fundamental equations of physics. Give us your full derivation, starting with, say, the underlying equations of string theory, and ending with '....therefore, Trump.'

Furthermore (as someone whose favourite subjects were always maths and physics) it sometimes seems to me it goes round in a loop, because sociology underlies all of them. It determines how all the other disciplines operate and what conclusions they come to. They are all, ultimately, sociological phenomena. Psychology, for example, strikes me as being largely a concequence of sociology. In my experience, psychologists believe what they do because it meets the socially-determined needs of the kind of people who become psychologists, not because it's true. That's why its record, both as a clinical practice and an academic discipline, is so bad!
Don't try to uplift that idiot!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
Sociology can't exist without Psychology

Psychology can't exist without Biology

Biology can't exist without Chemistry

Chemistry can't exist without Physics

Physics can't exist without Math

Math>Physics>Chemistry>Biology>Psychology>Sociology
Yet God exist without any of the above!!!
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,054
7,981
136
Yeah, but how do you prove math is correct? A number is something people made up, therefore it's wrong.

But if you were to prove math correct, you would do it through engineering. Checkmate, plebs.

Mathematics is the language of the universe. If we ever met an alien civilization we would be able to communicate with them through mathematics. The symbols we use may be chosen by us but we can create a Rosetta Stone of we ever met an alien civilization.

Engineering is applied physics, and you can't have applied physics without mathematics.

Checkmate douche.


It's as if Bertrand Russel and Wittgenstein were still with us! How's the Principia coming along?
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,516
8,103
136
Yet God exist without any of the above!!!
Ah, one vote for God. I think atheism is a pretty powerful modern concept with a lot to be said for it.

I started reading a really interesting book just recently. Am going slow because it's not entertainment, it's a book that should be thoroughly digested, the kind I've always preferred: Carl Sagan - The Demon-Haunted World

Sagan fills at least the beginning (probably all) with quotations, well, he drops them in from time to time, to be more accurate. One came to mind, and I'll repeat it here. It appears as the frontisepiece, before the beginning:

All our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike -- and yet it is the most precious thing we have. -- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
 
Last edited:

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,101
5,640
126
Can Maths exist without philosophy?

Good question. I think certain types of Math may have required Philosophy or some kind of Mind Expanding discipline. Oswald Spengler made a case for it being necessary in his book Decline of the West. In there he suggests that Math, Architecture, and other aspects of a Society are all influenced by the dominant Religious culture of that Society. One example was a society with a Religion that believed that there was a Beginning and End to Time, developed a Finite Numeral system and then showing an opposite where an Eternity Religious concept lead to an Infinite Numeral system.

I'm not entirely convinced that is the case though. If you look at the last 500ish years of Western History you can see Christianity changing dramatically due to Scientific Knowledge and certain Philosophical Concepts that gained prominence within Western Society. So it's kinda hard to pin one as more required than the other. Maybe all the variables feed into each other, Philosophy spurring new Math and new Math spurring new Philosophy?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
agreed

none of the others have provable correctness

But what they do not have is a causal link to reality. It is perfectly fine to create an internally consistent mathematical premise that is meaningless. So sure one can describe the trajectory of a falling body. Let's go to the math describing an n-body problem accurately. They exist but what says the math must?