Earlier this month, some of the feuding physicists met with
philosophers of science at an unusual workshop aimed at addressing the accusation that branches of theoretical physics have become detached from the realities of experimental science.
But
as philosopher of science Karl Popper might have said, before we can find the answers, we need the power to ask new questions.
A broad stream of opinion
among philosophers of science holds that coherence of explanations or theories is a necessary or at least a «conducive» criterion for truth.
Not until the 1980s and»90s did archival research by biographers and analysis
by philosophers of science uncover the manipulations of evidence, exploitation of patients and artful pseudoscience that were built into Freud's theoretical edifice.
He also possessed the works of most major post-scholastic philosophers - Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Bergson, Sartre et al - and
modern philosophers of science like Heisenberg.
According to Karl Popper, one of the most
influential philosophers of science in the past millennium, «In so far as a scientific statement speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable; and in so far as it is not falsifiable, it does not speak about reality.»
But I admit that I think it's a puzzle; and one fairly
good philosopher of science is convinced that clairvoyance does occur, and it would mean that there is a kind of reverse memory of what's going to happen.
The
heretical philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend, on the other hand, claimed that new theories frequently contradict the best available evidence — at least at first.
The first book in English by the distinguished Spanish
Catholic philosopher of science Mariano Artigas leaves the reader in no doubt as to the side of this divide on which its author belongs:
We must remember that Whitehead is not a metaphysician seeking to describe the ultimate facts of existence (so WM 17 - 20), but a
realist philosopher of science remarking on uniquely human matters such as perception and freedom.
Whitehead pointed out long ago, in Science and the Modern World, that the habits of medieval rationalism prepared the way for the scientific discoveries of the seventeenth century, an insight given far more documentation, depth, and scope in the writings of the historian and
philosopher of science Stanley L. Jaki in our time.
He considers it entirely appropriate for biologists to be concerned not only with how biological traits came about but also with what specific organic features are for, even though most scientists and
philosophers of science place questions of purpose outside the realm of research.
Indeed reason, in the guise of the prominent and
insightful philosopher of science Nancy Cartwright, allows that «we are imposing an order or rationality where there may be none... inventing our own universe».
In recent years, however, theologians have expressed a remarkable new interest in the sciences,
while philosophers of science such as Stephen Toulmin have shown some new interest in theology.
It was reading sociologists, anthropologists and philosophers (
including philosophers of science) that moved Lindbeck to propose a «cultural - linguistic» model for understanding religion.
The
reductive philosopher of science is like the man who says «I do not exist»: he vocally denies what, in deciding to speak / act intelligently, he psychologically affirms.
JRM: Another recent book, The Case of the Female Orgasm, by biologist and
philosopher of science Elisabeth Lloyd, examines the evidence for various adaptive explanations of female orgasms, and concludes that it has no evolutionary function.
In his 2010 book Nonsense on Stilts (University of Chicago Press),
philosopher of science Massimo Pigliucci concedes that there is «no litmus test,» because «the boundaries separating science, nonscience, and pseudoscience are much fuzzier and more permeable than Popper (or, for that matter, most scientists) would have us believe.»
Philosopher of science Daniel Hicks of Western University in London, Canada, has studied how sociopolitical and ethical concerns — for example, fears about abuse of intellectual property rights — get mixed up with the technical questions about food safety in the GMO debate.
This principle is the so - called Campbell's Law, developed by the famous social psychologist, evaluator, methodologist, and
philosopher of science Donald Campbell.