>>447
>Also the fact that both of those are still taught in schools isn't because "omfg teachers are lying to students". It's because under certain assumptions and restrictions those models still describe reality well, it's just that their domain of things they can describe accurately got shrunken down.

Agreed. The practicality taken out of those models feels relevant and even if there were better models, they would hardly reach that simplicity so well. I don't feel lied, just a limited view in which I get completely why its accesibility apeals so much for introducing the world of physics.
>Epistemology and ontology are my favourite branches of philosophy, but even still my immerssion in the topics is pretty shallow and entry level.
If it weren't because of the science branches and the job market (chemistry in particular),I would have picked philosophy. I think it's the one that offers you an open mind for everything you can learn and think about endlessly.

Learning in an uninterested way is a very marvellous gesture that everybody should apply more often(including me). The only (modified) truth that we know is our history, the actions we commit and the thoughts we decide to apply daily in our lives.

The more you know, less happiness (they said), but also more freedom of thought and liberty.