5 ms·

>On the contrary, it means that the stakes of the natural sciences exceed the expertise of the natural sciences and reach over into the arts. This makes a close

by foobar1962 9y ago

>On the contrary, it means that the stakes of the natural sciences exceed the expertise of the natural sciences and reach over into the arts. This makes a close collaboration of the life sciences with the human sciences imperative. Why do new findings like this lead people to conclude that “science needs philosophy” It’s never the philosophers that make the findings. And it’s not like the laws of physics will need to be re-written.

danieltillett 9y ago
To be generous this sentence could be interpreted as meaning the humanities need to take notice of what science is finding, not the other way around. Unless we metaphorically neutron bomb the humanities and start again nothing science discovers will have any influence on humanities. Edit. Humanities graduates how about engaging rather than knee jerk down voting anything that questions your world view.
- danharaj 9y ago
  > Humanities graduates how about engaging rather than knee jerk down voting anything that questions your world view I have a degree in mathematics.
  - danieltillett 9y ago
    Not quite the engagement I was looking for :)
gehwartzen 9y ago
Science needs phillosophy as one source of inspiration for new research. Many of humanities greatest scientists were also brilliant philosophers.
qplex 9y ago
There would be no science without philosophy. The scientific method _is_ philosophy. I think it's very important to retain the ability to postulate above scientifically proven things.
- whatshisface 9y ago
  >postulate above scientifically proven things That's just what theory is. Unless you mean postulating about things which are fundamentally unreachable by evidence, in which case I challenge the claim that they're ever important. (If they were important in a situation, then that situation would be an experiment that could confirm or deny them.) Not all philosophy is like that, of course. For example this comment, which is definitely philosophical and I hope not wrong!
  - qplex 9y ago
    Indeed. Epistemology aside, I'm definitely not arguing for religion or insanity.
ycombinete 9y ago
Philosophy is about asking questions, which eventually lead to separate disciplines, once frameworks for answering those questions have been created. Many discrete departments at a modern university have their roots in philosophy. I'm not arguing with your initial point, articles like this and the subsequent claims about science and philosophy are usually wrong. But I realise, from the responses to you claim that a lot of people are quite ignorant about philosophy and its history in science. There is a great quote in a Daily Nous article, about this: "many new disciplines have sprung forth from philosophy over the years: physics, psychology, logic, linguistics, economics, and so on. In each case, these fields have sprung forth as tools have been developed to address questions more precisely and more decisively. The key thesis is that when we develop methods for conclusively answering philosophical questions, those methods come to constitute a new field and the questions are no longer deemed philosophical." [0] http://dailynous.com/2017/08/23/intellectual-achievement-creating-questions/ http://dailynous.com/2017/08/23/intellectual-achievement-cre...
Retra 9y ago
"Philosophy is dead" - Stephen Hawking. Philosophers haven't bothered to learn modern science, they do not have the expertise necessary to do anything but pontificate on vagaries. Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways. Scientists do that now.
- Valmar 9y ago
  How arrogant. It is philosophy that gave birth to science is it is today. In fact, "science" was once known as "natural philosophy". Science is a practical philosophy based on experimentation via the scientific method. It is a philosophy, that is, a way of looking at the world. > Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways. What about Scientism, the religion that considers science to be the "One, True Way"? It usually incorporates the reductive materialist belief system quite heavily. And it is Scientism that arrogantly dismisses philosophy as some outmoded system, when in fact, Scientism is ironically a philosophical position itself, a religious one at that. Meanwhile, philosophy as a whole continues to explore different ways of looking at the world unabated, because it doesn't get side-tracked by ridiculous religious dogma. Meanwhile, science and the scientific method, those practical philosophical tools that have been very useful in the hands of those who care about positive and beneficial progress for all of mankind, continue marching on proudly, unconcerned by ridiculous religious dogma.
  - Retra 9y ago
    Arrogance isn't a fallacy in reasoning. Rejecting a belief because it sounds arrogant is particularly stupid kind of vanity.
    - FullMtlAlcoholc 9y ago
      Arrogance is rooted in self-importance. In fact, if one can glean common themes from science, it's that there is a distinct lack of self importance, that humans are special . The Earth is not the center of the universe, the sun and stars do not revolve around it, there is no center of the universe as every point can be considered the center, all motion is relative, etc.
jhedwards 9y ago
I think this misses a major fact which is that many revolutionary scientists were extremely philosophical people and developed new theories by thinking out of the box and reimagining the way things work instead of accepting the ideas of their time. There are people who were simply diligent and bright, like Karl Von Frisch, but, for example, Stephen J Gould basically started the entire field of developmental biology through his philosophical exploration of the idea that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.
FullMtlAlcoholc 9y ago
Because the concept of the conscious self being just a small part what constitutes one unit of homo sapiens has been part of philosophy for thousands of years. As I see it, philosophy is there to ask the big questions, having a say in the prioritization of the direction of R&D. Elon Musk asked himself what was most needed to ensure a prosperous future for humanity, and his answers were PayPal, SpaceX, Tesla, SolarCity, Neuralink and the Boring Company. They also happen to double at what a functioning Mars colony would need :)

danieltillett 9y ago

To be generous this sentence could be interpreted as meaning the humanities need to take notice of what science is finding, not the other way around. Unless we metaphorically neutron bomb the humanities and start again nothing science discovers will have any influence on humanities. Edit. Humanities graduates how about engaging rather than knee jerk down voting anything that questions your world view.

danharaj 9y ago
> Humanities graduates how about engaging rather than knee jerk down voting anything that questions your world view I have a degree in mathematics.
- danieltillett 9y ago
  Not quite the engagement I was looking for :)

gehwartzen 9y ago

Science needs phillosophy as one source of inspiration for new research. Many of humanities greatest scientists were also brilliant philosophers.

qplex 9y ago

There would be no science without philosophy. The scientific method _is_ philosophy. I think it's very important to retain the ability to postulate above scientifically proven things.

whatshisface 9y ago
>postulate above scientifically proven things That's just what theory is. Unless you mean postulating about things which are fundamentally unreachable by evidence, in which case I challenge the claim that they're ever important. (If they were important in a situation, then that situation would be an experiment that could confirm or deny them.) Not all philosophy is like that, of course. For example this comment, which is definitely philosophical and I hope not wrong!
- qplex 9y ago
  Indeed. Epistemology aside, I'm definitely not arguing for religion or insanity.

ycombinete 9y ago

Philosophy is about asking questions, which eventually lead to separate disciplines, once frameworks for answering those questions have been created. Many discrete departments at a modern university have their roots in philosophy. I'm not arguing with your initial point, articles like this and the subsequent claims about science and philosophy are usually wrong. But I realise, from the responses to you claim that a lot of people are quite ignorant about philosophy and its history in science. There is a great quote in a Daily Nous article, about this: "many new disciplines have sprung forth from philosophy over the years: physics, psychology, logic, linguistics, economics, and so on. In each case, these fields have sprung forth as tools have been developed to address questions more precisely and more decisively. The key thesis is that when we develop methods for conclusively answering philosophical questions, those methods come to constitute a new field and the questions are no longer deemed philosophical." [0] http://dailynous.com/2017/08/23/intellectual-achievement-creating-questions/ http://dailynous.com/2017/08/23/intellectual-achievement-cre...

Retra 9y ago

"Philosophy is dead" - Stephen Hawking. Philosophers haven't bothered to learn modern science, they do not have the expertise necessary to do anything but pontificate on vagaries. Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways. Scientists do that now.

Valmar 9y ago
How arrogant. It is philosophy that gave birth to science is it is today. In fact, "science" was once known as "natural philosophy". Science is a practical philosophy based on experimentation via the scientific method. It is a philosophy, that is, a way of looking at the world. > Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways. What about Scientism, the religion that considers science to be the "One, True Way"? It usually incorporates the reductive materialist belief system quite heavily. And it is Scientism that arrogantly dismisses philosophy as some outmoded system, when in fact, Scientism is ironically a philosophical position itself, a religious one at that. Meanwhile, philosophy as a whole continues to explore different ways of looking at the world unabated, because it doesn't get side-tracked by ridiculous religious dogma. Meanwhile, science and the scientific method, those practical philosophical tools that have been very useful in the hands of those who care about positive and beneficial progress for all of mankind, continue marching on proudly, unconcerned by ridiculous religious dogma.
- Retra 9y ago
  Arrogance isn't a fallacy in reasoning. Rejecting a belief because it sounds arrogant is particularly stupid kind of vanity.
  - FullMtlAlcoholc 9y ago
    Arrogance is rooted in self-importance. In fact, if one can glean common themes from science, it's that there is a distinct lack of self importance, that humans are special . The Earth is not the center of the universe, the sun and stars do not revolve around it, there is no center of the universe as every point can be considered the center, all motion is relative, etc.

jhedwards 9y ago

I think this misses a major fact which is that many revolutionary scientists were extremely philosophical people and developed new theories by thinking out of the box and reimagining the way things work instead of accepting the ideas of their time. There are people who were simply diligent and bright, like Karl Von Frisch, but, for example, Stephen J Gould basically started the entire field of developmental biology through his philosophical exploration of the idea that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.

FullMtlAlcoholc 9y ago

Because the concept of the conscious self being just a small part what constitutes one unit of homo sapiens has been part of philosophy for thousands of years. As I see it, philosophy is there to ask the big questions, having a say in the prioritization of the direction of R&D. Elon Musk asked himself what was most needed to ensure a prosperous future for humanity, and his answers were PayPal, SpaceX, Tesla, SolarCity, Neuralink and the Boring Company. They also happen to double at what a functioning Mars colony would need :)