Skwinty
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
- Messages
- 5,593
On Philosophy and Science
As todays physicist often say that the "WHY" question is better left to the philosophers because it has no consequence in physics, I put together this list of quotations from Einstein as I believe that he was primarily a philosopher then a physicist and then a mathematician. He had read all 3 of Kants works by age 16.
Careful reflection on philosophical ideas is rare. Worse still , publicly indulging an interest in philosophy of science is often treated as social blunder.
When aked by Robert A Thornton to assist in convincing his colleagues to accept philosophy as part of physics, Einstein replied:
"I fully agree with you about the significance and educational value of methodology as well as history and philosophy of science. So many people today - and even professional scientists - seem to me like someone who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independance from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independance created by philosophical insight is - in my opinion - the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth"
Some years after writing this letter to Thornton Einstein wrote:
"The reciprocal relationship of epistomology and science is of noteworthy kind. They are dependant on each other. Epistomology without contact with science becomes an empty scheme. Science without epistomology is- insofar as it is thinkable at all- primitive and muddled."
Einstein explaining why the physicist should not defer to the philosopher, but must be a philosopher himself.
"It has often been said, and certainly not without justification, that the man of science is a poor philosopher. Why then should it not be the right thing for the physicist to let the philosopher do the philosphising? Such might indeed be the right thing to do at a time when the physicist believes he has at his disposal a rigid system of fundamental laws which are so well established that waves of doubt cant reach them: but it cannot be right at a time when the very foundation of physics itself have become problematic as they are now. At a time like the present, when experience forces us to seek a new and more solid foundation, the physicist cannot simply surrender to the philosopher the critical contemplation of theoretical foundations: for he himself knows best and feels more surely where the shoe pinches."
Reference: Essay by Don A Howard Prof of Philosophy Univ Notre Dame Indiana.
Published in Physics Today Dec 2005.
On Cranks
1. Cranks tend to use lots of exlamation points and capitals.
2. Their theories ignore the second law of thermodynamics.
3. The ignore correspondence and oversights of others.
4. They have no understanding or appreciation of the scientific matrix in which their work is embedded.
5. Their processes never converge.
6. They never make predictions
Bear in mind that 2 predictions made by Einstein in his 1905 Relativity paper(which had a very philosophical tone), when tested at the time were wrong or in disagreement with the theory.
These were the mass of an electron and the speed of clocks at the pole and equator.
Reference: Cranks, Quarks and the Cosmos Jeremy Bernstein Prof Physics Stevens Institute of Technology.
As todays physicist often say that the "WHY" question is better left to the philosophers because it has no consequence in physics, I put together this list of quotations from Einstein as I believe that he was primarily a philosopher then a physicist and then a mathematician. He had read all 3 of Kants works by age 16.
Careful reflection on philosophical ideas is rare. Worse still , publicly indulging an interest in philosophy of science is often treated as social blunder.
When aked by Robert A Thornton to assist in convincing his colleagues to accept philosophy as part of physics, Einstein replied:
"I fully agree with you about the significance and educational value of methodology as well as history and philosophy of science. So many people today - and even professional scientists - seem to me like someone who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independance from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independance created by philosophical insight is - in my opinion - the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth"
Some years after writing this letter to Thornton Einstein wrote:
"The reciprocal relationship of epistomology and science is of noteworthy kind. They are dependant on each other. Epistomology without contact with science becomes an empty scheme. Science without epistomology is- insofar as it is thinkable at all- primitive and muddled."
Einstein explaining why the physicist should not defer to the philosopher, but must be a philosopher himself.
"It has often been said, and certainly not without justification, that the man of science is a poor philosopher. Why then should it not be the right thing for the physicist to let the philosopher do the philosphising? Such might indeed be the right thing to do at a time when the physicist believes he has at his disposal a rigid system of fundamental laws which are so well established that waves of doubt cant reach them: but it cannot be right at a time when the very foundation of physics itself have become problematic as they are now. At a time like the present, when experience forces us to seek a new and more solid foundation, the physicist cannot simply surrender to the philosopher the critical contemplation of theoretical foundations: for he himself knows best and feels more surely where the shoe pinches."
Reference: Essay by Don A Howard Prof of Philosophy Univ Notre Dame Indiana.
Published in Physics Today Dec 2005.
On Cranks
1. Cranks tend to use lots of exlamation points and capitals.
2. Their theories ignore the second law of thermodynamics.
3. The ignore correspondence and oversights of others.
4. They have no understanding or appreciation of the scientific matrix in which their work is embedded.
5. Their processes never converge.
6. They never make predictions
Bear in mind that 2 predictions made by Einstein in his 1905 Relativity paper(which had a very philosophical tone), when tested at the time were wrong or in disagreement with the theory.
These were the mass of an electron and the speed of clocks at the pole and equator.
Reference: Cranks, Quarks and the Cosmos Jeremy Bernstein Prof Physics Stevens Institute of Technology.
