Tag: Philosophy

What Scientific Arrogance Really Looks Like — Starts With A Bang! — Medium

Ethan Siegel weighs in on the Tyson / philosophy controversy.  Siegel is a theoretical physicist, notably a cosmologist which I believe is Tyson's own specialty.  But Siegel's views on philosophy appear to be much more informed. Now, philosophy doesn’t have the answers, but it does teach ways to consider the limits of our knowledge. And … Continue reading What Scientific Arrogance Really Looks Like — Starts With A Bang! — Medium →

Neil deGrasse Tyson is wrong to dismiss all of philosophy, but he may have a point on some of it

So, I reblogged Massimo Pigliucci's post responding to Tyson's remarks about philosophy, which appears to have generated some heated discussion.  After reading some of it, I realized that I have a few thoughts on this. First, I suspect Tyson's blanket dismissal of philosophy is simply the result of insularity.  I've noticed that philosophy's critics tend to be those … Continue reading Neil deGrasse Tyson is wrong to dismiss all of philosophy, but he may have a point on some of it →

Is Philosophy Obsolete? – The Chronicle Review

Rebecca Goldstein appears to be on a campaign to defend philosophy.  In this essay, she defends its ability to make progress, and questions whether it should be lumped in with the humanities.  (I wonder what the humanities folks will think of that.) Philosophy was the first academic field; the founder of the Academy was Plato. … Continue reading Is Philosophy Obsolete? – The Chronicle Review →

The value of history

Tom Chivers has a particularly misguided post up The Telegraph arguing that science is better than history.  Given how under siege many in the humanities feel themselves to be today, this post is unnecessarily adversarial.  Chivers does claim to recognize that history is a valuable endeavor (albeit limited in his view), but argues that if you … Continue reading The value of history →

The fine tuning “problem”

An interesting article byJonathan Borwein and David H. Bailey on why science needs philosophy. When renowned scientists now talk seriously about millions of multiverses, the old question “are we alone?” gets a whole new meaning. Our ever-expanding universe is incomprehensibly large – and its rate of growth is apparently accelerating – but if so it’s … Continue reading The fine tuning “problem” →

How do you separate the objective from the subjective?

So, I'm a skeptic, and I've had my share of debates on comment threads with people about purported phenomena without scientific evidence.  One of the claims often asserted is that so many people have experienced it, there must be something there.  It's not unusual for these debates to get mired in epistemological fights about how … Continue reading How do you separate the objective from the subjective? →

The difference between life and machine

Addy Pross has an interesting post up at HuffPost looking at what actually makes life...life. Most of us recognize that there is a fundamental difference between mechanical objects designed and created by man, no matter how sophisticated, and the naturally derived complexity of living things. In fact, my granddaughter, when she was just 2, already … Continue reading The difference between life and machine →