Why do new findings like this lead people to conclude that “science needs philosophy” It’s never the philosophers that make the findings.
And it’s not like the laws of physics will need to be re-written.
The scientific method _is_ philosophy.
I think it's very important to retain the ability to postulate above scientifically proven things.
That's just what theory is. Unless you mean postulating about things which are fundamentally unreachable by evidence, in which case I challenge the claim that they're ever important. (If they were important in a situation, then that situation would be an experiment that could confirm or deny them.)
Not all philosophy is like that, of course. For example this comment, which is definitely philosophical and I hope not wrong!
I'm not arguing with your initial point, articles like this and the subsequent claims about science and philosophy are usually wrong. But I realise, from the responses to you claim that a lot of people are quite ignorant about philosophy and its history in science.
There is a great quote in a Daily Nous article, about this: "many new disciplines have sprung forth from philosophy over the years: physics, psychology, logic, linguistics, economics, and so on. In each case, these fields have sprung forth as tools have been developed to address questions more precisely and more decisively. The key thesis is that when we develop methods for conclusively answering philosophical questions, those methods come to constitute a new field and the questions are no longer deemed philosophical."
[0] http://dailynous.com/2017/08/23/intellectual-achievement-cre...
Unless we metaphorically neutron bomb the humanities and start again nothing science discovers will have any influence on humanities.
Edit. Humanities graduates how about engaging rather than knee jerk down voting anything that questions your world view.
I have a degree in mathematics.
Philosophers haven't bothered to learn modern science, they do not have the expertise necessary to do anything but pontificate on vagaries. Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways. Scientists do that now.
Incorrect.
> they do not have the expertise necessary to do anything but pontificate on vagaries
Also incorrect.
> Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways.
3 for 3, congratulations!
It is philosophy that gave birth to science is it is today. In fact, "science" was once known as "natural philosophy".
Science is a practical philosophy based on experimentation via the scientific method. It is a philosophy, that is, a way of looking at the world.
> Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways.
What about Scientism, the religion that considers science to be the "One, True Way"? It usually incorporates the reductive materialist belief system quite heavily.
And it is Scientism that arrogantly dismisses philosophy as some outmoded system, when in fact, Scientism is ironically a philosophical position itself, a religious one at that.
Meanwhile, philosophy as a whole continues to explore different ways of looking at the world unabated, because it doesn't get side-tracked by ridiculous religious dogma.
Meanwhile, science and the scientific method, those practical philosophical tools that have been very useful in the hands of those who care about positive and beneficial progress for all of mankind, continue marching on proudly, unconcerned by ridiculous religious dogma.
I've read less of Daniel Dennet, but he has been influential in the theory of mind and the direction that some AI research has taken.
When I think of modern philosophers, these are the giants.
> Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways.
It's funny that you mention that. While at undergrad I took a biology class taught by Robert Sapolsky (I consider him equal parts scientist and philosopher) where he philosophized on the origin of religiosity using scientific findings and research. Would you like ot know more: http://www.openculture.com/2014/12/robert-sapolsky-explains-...
They're not completely distinct fields of study, they operate on a spectrum as science and philsophy go hand in hand. The big questions in philosophy are somewhat neatly summed up in 4 questions: Who am I? What do I want? Why am I here? Where am I going? Substitute we for I, and then that pretty much sums up the questions science tries to answer.