RS35 - What is Philosophy of Science Good For?
Release date: May 22, 2011
In this episode we explore philosophy of science: What is it about, and should it matter to scientists? Massimo and Julia also discuss some of the most important questions in philosophy of science now, and some historical debates between leading philosophers of science, like Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper, over how science should or does work.
So is philosophy of science, as Richard Feynman famously quipped, "as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds?" Or was philosopher Daniel Dennett closer to the truth when he said, "There is no such thing as philosophy-free science, only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on-board unexamined?"
Comment on the episode teaser.
Julia's pick: "The End of Discovery: Are We Approaching the Boundaries of the Knowable?"
Massimo's pick: The blog entry 10 Important Differences Between Brains and Computers
2 Comments
Reader Comments (2)
Depressing to hear the call for philosophers to study quantum physics for a few years before jumping into that space instead of simply referring them to post-modern philosophers, who can get well-intentioned readers to the same place in less than a month. Part of the problem I think is the idea that truth, falsehood, reality etc...need to go the way of all absolutes. Not necessarily down the chute, but at a minimum be considered in context of its consumers. But it is not so radical, this idea, it simply means prefixing the word 'science' with the word 'our'.
Regarding the different ways of doing science and the different views of Kuhn and Popper, in most cases there is no point of using the falsification principle. Once a parafigm is established trying to falsify it is a waste of time and not usefull. Falsifiability is reasonable when a new theory is presented and in fact this how it works. When the theory of relativity was presented scientist did try to falsify it with no success. Why should someone try to falsify evolution today? However, when results from an established theory raise questions or are not consistent with each other than scientist start to look at the roots of the theory to see if something is wrong.