3 ms·

Those are his words. They are not out of context. I don't see how any of that negates the effect of one of science's pre-eminent public advocates bad mouthing

Those are his words. They are not out of context. I don't see how any of that negates the effect of one of science's pre-eminent public advocates bad mouthing philosophy and the humanities. People hear this and take it at face value. It informs their opinions. It shapes their lives. And it's his purpose to shape people lives. He is partially responsible for the proliferation of similar views throughout the intellectual ecosystem. On this point, he is being irresponsible and ignorant. He ought to have and communicate more nuanced views of the world. I am having a lot of trouble understanding how their is anything but a tortured defense of his behavior on this front.

hackinthebochs 3y ago
Man, if philosophy can't take (an admittedly popular) guy saying rather milquetoast things about philosophy (whether right or wrong), the discipline is in worse shape than I thought. Philosophy should be capable of defending itself, it shouldn't need to rely on deferential treatment and a widespread presumption of value. Philosophy doesn't deserve deference or respect simply because it's an academic discipline. We've been far too deferential to questionable disciplines and their practitioners, and the academy is in bad shape because of it. Disciplines should be constantly challenged and expected to offer full throated defenses of their merits. If philosophy wants to be valued, it needs to actively demonstrate it's value. if the only thing it can do is get defensive when someone says something negative publicly about it, we might as well just shut it all down now because there's truly nothing left.
- ryanklee 3y ago
  > if philosophy can't take It's got nothing to do with what philosophy can't take. The context of this conversation: science is not self-sufficient to be a force for good in this world without the aid of the humanities. Scientism is naive and self-undermining.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  "Man, if philosophy can't take (an admittedly popular) guy saying rather milquetoast things about philosophy (whether right or wrong), the discipline is in worse shape than I thought." Not what this discussions is about at all. That is some straw man rhetoric. That actual point was "Hey STEM people, you are talking in circles yourselves, and re-inventing the wheel, maybe checkout what some other fields have already studied"
  - hackinthebochs 3y ago
    The issue of NDT and Hawking dismissing philosophy is a mostly separate issue from the original topic and ryanklee turned this branch into that narrow issue. My reply is specifically addressing that subtopic.

hackinthebochs 3y ago

Man, if philosophy can't take (an admittedly popular) guy saying rather milquetoast things about philosophy (whether right or wrong), the discipline is in worse shape than I thought. Philosophy should be capable of defending itself, it shouldn't need to rely on deferential treatment and a widespread presumption of value. Philosophy doesn't deserve deference or respect simply because it's an academic discipline. We've been far too deferential to questionable disciplines and their practitioners, and the academy is in bad shape because of it. Disciplines should be constantly challenged and expected to offer full throated defenses of their merits. If philosophy wants to be valued, it needs to actively demonstrate it's value. if the only thing it can do is get defensive when someone says something negative publicly about it, we might as well just shut it all down now because there's truly nothing left.

ryanklee 3y ago
> if philosophy can't take It's got nothing to do with what philosophy can't take. The context of this conversation: science is not self-sufficient to be a force for good in this world without the aid of the humanities. Scientism is naive and self-undermining.
FrustratedMonky 3y ago
"Man, if philosophy can't take (an admittedly popular) guy saying rather milquetoast things about philosophy (whether right or wrong), the discipline is in worse shape than I thought." Not what this discussions is about at all. That is some straw man rhetoric. That actual point was "Hey STEM people, you are talking in circles yourselves, and re-inventing the wheel, maybe checkout what some other fields have already studied"
- hackinthebochs 3y ago
  The issue of NDT and Hawking dismissing philosophy is a mostly separate issue from the original topic and ryanklee turned this branch into that narrow issue. My reply is specifically addressing that subtopic.