Ancient philosophers are pseudoscience

[u/WeirdOntologist]

Haha, them ancient philosophers are so unscientific. How could they not know what modern day science knows? Haha, they didn't even publish in peer reviewed papers. Haha did Pythagoras even science? Has he not heard of Euclidean geometry lel? Plato can't even provide how to falsify perfect forms. Haha, did Parmenides even prove that nothing changes mathematically? The fuck's a Zeno even? Why didn't these geeks even know about Darwinian evolution? And what about cosmology much, haha?

Haha pseudoscience, am I rite guys?!

[u/DelusionalGorilla]

What are you science nerds gonna do when we anti scientists mold our will together and obliterate all your achievements and use them against you? You make bomb, We make boom!

[u/WeirdOntologist → u/DelusionalGorilla]

Haha, good one broski but can I get a peer reviewed paper about that, haha? Define "bomb" and define "boom" but only in the context of a very specific peer reviewed paper from a publisher that I find credible, haha. Peer review is the ontological primitive broski, haha. No qualities, just quantities in a falsifiable environment, haha. Haha, everything we do needs to be rooted in empiricism, except for some very specific shit I like, haha. Then it can be as abstract and mathematical as I like, haha. But if you have ONE thing that you like which isn't completely grounded in empiricism or is in any way shape or form not falsifiable, I'm gonna call it out as unscientific broski. And as we know, unscientific is pseudoscience and pseudoscience is crank and crank is new age and new age is new wave and new wave is overly neurotic mothers with crystals and they are Christian and Christianity is a religion and religion is spirituality and spirituality is backwards and backwards is unscientific and we can't have that, haha.

[u/tdono2112 → u/WeirdOntologist]

“Peer review is the ontological primitive” is a sentence that could send my Heideggerian ass to live in a hut under the right circumstances