Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Has science made philosophy redundant?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60

Time Tourist

Only the most unimaginative would think so.

Hawking was, I take it, speaking in a very restrictive sense.

Reply 61

adamrules247

Not a serious philosopher and this point has probably already been made but it is impossible for science to bury philosophy for two reasons. 1. Science itself rests upon a philosophical statement that the universe and everything in it is rationally intelligible to the human mind. This is a philosophical and not scientific statement. 2. If science attempts to divorce itself from philosophy, including ethics, then it becomes its own justification with no boundries. Science for the sake of science and its advance, is a terrifying thing to imagine.

Reply 62

bordercollies10

There is a lot of similarities between science and philosophy. Philosophy literally means "love of knowledge" and in a way, science enhances or removes the presence of sceptism from theories entertained philosophically - therefore converting indefinite knowledge into definite knowledge. Philosophy can also help to rationilise the implications of science (such as the famous Chinese room experiment which compares a rule book to software and a human, carrying out the instruction, as a processor. The point was that software is only ever a finatry requiremnet of what a computer will do, algorithmically, and that the person mimicing the processor won't really learn a word of Chinese - a piece of paper for keeping notes on for faster retrieval can simulate RAM) and can also help to explore different speculationsofthe effects of technological advancements...

Reply 63

Snagprophet

I think philosophy makes light of human logic.

I think it actually relates to human design, rather than to God's or natural design. It's like how psychology relates to human nature rather than science.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 64

Bobifier

Original post by adamrules247

I know a number of scientists at my university, and I have yet to meet one who studies in their field for any reason other than that they think it is kind of cool. Without science for the sake of science, we would not have any science at all.

Reply 65

Onewingedangel

When was philosophy not redundant? It's just a bunch of rambling by people who have too much time on their hands.

Reply 66

duninsany

There is a big change taking place in terms of philosophy's role in culture. People are beginning to grasp that science provides the ultimate answers in that the answers provided by science remain physical constants regardless of what philosophers think about their meaning to human mental categories like virtue or beauty. Only more empirical research can disprove scientific facts, while philosophers can only manipulate abstract strategies on how we should orient ourselves towards them intellectually.

The hierarchy has changed. Science is no longer perceived as the little cousin of philosophy but quite the other way round. It is empirical science, not philosophy, that is opening our minds to reality. The only thing philosophers can do in this situation is to claim that all intellectual activity, including science, is "ultimately" philosophy.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 67

username1921011

No. Science is the empirical world of what objectively is. Philosophy is the theory of the metaphysical, that which has no objective answer but rather shapes everything by theoretical means. Science cannot run a country, make laws or define morality because all of these are based on philosophical concepts with no objective basis. Science can only explain, never explore the human condition and therein lies the fundamental difference

Posted from TSR Mobile