Philosophy and science
By: Justarius on Feb 17 2007Category: On Philosophy
Things were much simpler in the old days. The ancient Greeks didn’t categorize everything into the many fields and specialties that we have today; they didn’t even have the scientific method. There was just the unknown and the people who investigated it. These early investigators were philosophers, curiously poking and prodding in what would become our modern day fields of physics, astronomy, mathematics, history, political science, and philosophy.
Philosophy laid the groundwork that made the modern sciences possible by applying reason to observable natural and human phenomena. Rather than chalking up something as “the will of the gods,” philosophers sought rational explanations. The ancient Greeks were wrong about many things, but they were also surprisingly on target with some of their discoveries. Regardless, by passing down the spirit of rational discovery, philosophy can be considered the father of science.
Today, the son has far exceeded the father, branching into hundreds of specialties and subspecialties. Science basks in the glow of the spotlight while philosophy has quietly retreated to the ivory tower of academia. Before we dismiss philosophy as useless in our scientific world, we would do well to remember the special relationship between them. Will Durant described it best when he wrote:
“Science seems always to advance, while philosophy seems always to lose ground. Yet this is only because philosophy accepts the hard and hazardous task of dealing problems not yet open to the methods of science - problems like good and evil, beauty and ugliness, order and freedom, life and death; as soon as a field of inquiry yields knowledge susceptible to exact formulation it is called science…Philosophy seems to stand still, perplexed; but only because she leave the fruits of victory to her daughters the sciences, and herself passes on, divinely discontent, to the uncertain and unexplored.” The Story of Philosophy, p. xxvi
We would be rather mistaken to think philosophy is useless today; in fact, perhaps we need it more than ever. As society struggles to keep pace with materialistic scientific discoveries, an ever widening gap develops that can create confusion and disillusionment. Philosophy can help bridge this gap by “humanizing” these discoveries. Science may also be approaching a point when it cannot satisfactorily explain certain things with only experiment and observation (ie. free will and string theory). Having pondered such concepts for centuries, perhaps philosophy, the old man, can still offer useful insights on such topics.
If you liked this, share!
Email or post to social networks
Link here
Simply copy and paste the code below into your web site (Ctrl+C to copy)
to get a link that look like this: Philosophy and science
2 Responses to “Philosophy and science”
Leave a Reply
© 2006-Present by Philoscifi. All rights reserved.
Powered WordPress and Monotone design
“Science has unearthed more knowledge than we know what to do with, but facts and figures without synthesis just create confusion and disillusionment.”
I am rather offended by this above statement. Facts and figures without synthesis? What about the people who devote their lives to writing of textbooks and educating the next generation? What about the millions of review articles that I can find in the literature?
“Science is also rapidly approaching a point when it cannot satisfactorily explain certain things with only experiment and observation (ie. free will and string theory). This is where philosophy, the old man, steps up and shows that he still has a few things to teach.”
So how do you think that you, as a philosopher, can explain things that we scientists cannot? If I tell you that the current formulation of string theory is problematic because the equations blow up? Do you know what that means? How do you suppose that you can solve this problem?
I have reworded the final paragraph because the original obviously did not convey my intent. I have a great respect for science. I do not mean to suggest that philosophy is somehow “better” than science, only that it is still useful despite popular opinion to the contrary. They are related; in fact, the two work together for the most part, not against each other. Science’s job is to push the boundaries of knowledge, and it does so at a phenomenal rate. But this leaves an ever increasing gap between quantitative knowledge and qualitative considerations. Philosophy can help society close this gap.
At the time I wrote this article, I believed that there were some things that might be too difficult to scientifically prove or verify, citing free will and string theory as examples. This is really a matter of opinion. Many scientists and some philosophers (e.g. Daniel C. Dennett) believe that it’s only a matter of time before science unlocks the mechanics behind “free will.” As for string theory, many scientists acknowledge that it will be exceedingly difficult to verify the existence of multiple dimensions and superstrings. My mind will likely change as science advances. Until they are officially superseded by science, I believe that philosophical explanations can still be useful. They shouldn’t be dismissed simply because they are “not science;” they are based on logic too.