RandomPoster
Platinum Member
- May 22, 2017
- 2,584
- 1,794
- 970
Here is a video where a Physicist named Lawrence Krauss has a discussion with Philosophers and attempts to help them gain a better perspective on how to approach the process of furthering knowledge
Here are some completely rational quotes of his that the rest of the panel and most of the commenters on the video seem to disagree with. It was an interesting video.
"If you can't empirically measure it, it isn't knowledge in my opinion."
How can anyone disagree with that opinion? The panel seemed irritated and so do most of the commenters on the video.
"The only philosophy I need to do is not the philosophy I learned from Popper or Kuhn or any … oh I read them all. I learned the philosophy of science from Feynman because I learned how science is done from scientists."
This seemed to upset the panel for some unknown reason when all he did is describe his personal experiences and how he practices in his own field.
One of the philosophers said the following about him.
"He claims that the only knowledge we have of the world is empirical knowledge"
I don't see how this can be controversial.
"it's somewhat a surprise to me to see that professor Krause still holds to the principles of logical positivism. It seems to me that he's saying we should only believe that which can be scientifically proven, which is a self-refuting position"
What?
"but still I couldn't help resisting on this gospel of the New Atheists to whom professor Krauss belongs. For 2000 years, the Christian God has formed our culture to every new generation "You are much more significant than you could ever have imagined". My question is what will happen with the culture?"
Why would science be concerned with culture?
In another video, Krauss made the following statements:
"If you can't empirically measure it, it isn't knowledge in my opinion."
"I don't think there are other ways of knowing. If you think about what we know, other ways of knowing are an illusion. It doesn't come from revelation. It ultimately comes from an empirical basis."
Krauss makes a lot of sense, except people reacted negatively towards him. He's actually trying to help the field of Philosophy of Science. Other scientists appear to have given up on the field. Steven Hawking said "Philosophy is dead." Richard Feynman stated "The philosophy of science is as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.” Bill Nye and Neil de Grasse Tyson have basically called Philosophy of Science irrelevant.
I have been reading that before the 1950s, the relationship between philosophers and scientists was much better and has been deteriorating over time. Einstein had very positive things to say about Philosophers and there is an exchange of letters between Einstein and a Philosopher of Science named Moritz Schlick in 1915 that can be found on the internet which suggests that Einstein very much respected the viewpoints of Philosophers of Science.
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2169428?journalCode=pto&
"Einstein writes to physicist—philosopher Schlick (1882–1936), a professor of philosophy at the University of Rostock who was to become a founder of the Vienna Circle of logical empiricists. Einstein is responding to an essay Schlick wrote on special and general relativity shortly before the general theory was published in its final form in November 1915. Einstein points out that relativity theory is a blow to the Kantian doctrine that the human mind has a priori knowledge of some absolute truths about the real world"
Can scientists help Philosophers of Science save their field and make it relevant again by showing them a better way of thinking?
Here are some completely rational quotes of his that the rest of the panel and most of the commenters on the video seem to disagree with. It was an interesting video.
"If you can't empirically measure it, it isn't knowledge in my opinion."
How can anyone disagree with that opinion? The panel seemed irritated and so do most of the commenters on the video.
"The only philosophy I need to do is not the philosophy I learned from Popper or Kuhn or any … oh I read them all. I learned the philosophy of science from Feynman because I learned how science is done from scientists."
This seemed to upset the panel for some unknown reason when all he did is describe his personal experiences and how he practices in his own field.
One of the philosophers said the following about him.
"He claims that the only knowledge we have of the world is empirical knowledge"
I don't see how this can be controversial.
"it's somewhat a surprise to me to see that professor Krause still holds to the principles of logical positivism. It seems to me that he's saying we should only believe that which can be scientifically proven, which is a self-refuting position"
What?
"but still I couldn't help resisting on this gospel of the New Atheists to whom professor Krauss belongs. For 2000 years, the Christian God has formed our culture to every new generation "You are much more significant than you could ever have imagined". My question is what will happen with the culture?"
Why would science be concerned with culture?
In another video, Krauss made the following statements:
"If you can't empirically measure it, it isn't knowledge in my opinion."
"I don't think there are other ways of knowing. If you think about what we know, other ways of knowing are an illusion. It doesn't come from revelation. It ultimately comes from an empirical basis."
Krauss makes a lot of sense, except people reacted negatively towards him. He's actually trying to help the field of Philosophy of Science. Other scientists appear to have given up on the field. Steven Hawking said "Philosophy is dead." Richard Feynman stated "The philosophy of science is as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.” Bill Nye and Neil de Grasse Tyson have basically called Philosophy of Science irrelevant.
I have been reading that before the 1950s, the relationship between philosophers and scientists was much better and has been deteriorating over time. Einstein had very positive things to say about Philosophers and there is an exchange of letters between Einstein and a Philosopher of Science named Moritz Schlick in 1915 that can be found on the internet which suggests that Einstein very much respected the viewpoints of Philosophers of Science.
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2169428?journalCode=pto&
"Einstein writes to physicist—philosopher Schlick (1882–1936), a professor of philosophy at the University of Rostock who was to become a founder of the Vienna Circle of logical empiricists. Einstein is responding to an essay Schlick wrote on special and general relativity shortly before the general theory was published in its final form in November 1915. Einstein points out that relativity theory is a blow to the Kantian doctrine that the human mind has a priori knowledge of some absolute truths about the real world"
Can scientists help Philosophers of Science save their field and make it relevant again by showing them a better way of thinking?