Many philosophers of science are understandably excited about Neil deGrasse Tyson's reinvorgoration of the TV show Cosmos.  After all, most of us are pretty excited about science and anything that improves the public's scientific literacy.  Thus, it is extremely disappointing to hear him articulate the comments that he does at about 1:02:46 of this video.* He says that a "philosopher is a would-be scientist without a laboratory" and that we have been "rendered essentially obsolete."  He later suggests that there is much positive work that a philosophers can do (in ethics, for example), but doesn't seem to think that there can be any good philosophy of science.  (Richard Dawkins, who is also shown in the video, seems to take a slightly more positive view of the field). 

This morning, I saw two things that shook the cobwebs: 1) Eric Winsberg's intriguing post about dark matter, and, more to the point at hand, the fact that he was at an event that involved astronmers and philosophers, and 2) with the web announcement for a “Genomics and Philosophy of Race” Conference that I am a part of, involving both biologists and philosophers (not to mention historians and sociologists).  These two events are only two of the many, many productive collaborations between scientists and philosophers of science.  We need to do a better job telling people about them, and about telling the general public what philosophers of science do.

* H/T to Lucas Matthews, graduate stuent at the University of Utah, for the pointer to the video and NdGT's attitude toward philosophy of science

Posted in , , ,

8 responses to “Positive interactions between scientists and philosophers”

  1. Alan White Avatar
    Alan White

    It’s odd then that just last night Tyson on Cosmos touted Einstein’s youthful thought-experiment about surfing on a light-wave! And though he didn’t mention it, E’s later thought-experiment about all objects falling in a gravitational field was his first insight about expanding the concept of inertial frames (in general relativity) in his equivalence principle.
    Einstein was a consummate philosopher with great physical intuitions allied with good-enough math skills.

    Like

  2. Roberta L. Millstein Avatar

    Hmm, yes, interesting. I think the general problem here is a misconception about what it means to be a philosopher of science.

    Like

  3. Catarina Dutilh Novaes Avatar

    Philosophy-bashing by scientists is a truly unfortunate trend. It’s true that some of it may be motivated by the arrogant attitude of philosophy presenting itself as the ‘tribunal of reason’ (Kant springs to mind?), but it’s been a very long time that most philosophers of science have a horizontal, as opposed to vertical view of the relationship between science and philosophy.
    You are absolutely right, Roberta, that it’s up to us to inform the general public and scientists themselves about these numerous instances of collaboration between philosophers and scientists, in a number of disciplines. (My blogging at M-Phi for example attracts quite some readers from mathematics, and the interactions are usually very fruitful.)

    Like

  4. Roberta L. Millstein Avatar

    That’s great to hear about your fruitful interactions with mathematicians at M-Phi! If others have productive interactions they’d like to highlight, please feel free to do so here. I’d also welcome suggestions for how we can make such practices more visible.

    Like

  5. Catarina Dutilh Novaes Avatar

    FWIW, I also have very positive interactions with some psychologists/cognitive scientists working on reasoning (people like Keith Stenning and David Over, among others), and I know of many philosophers actively collaborating with other psychologists/cognitive scientists (e.g. Fabrizio Cariani collaborating with Lance Rips).
    There are many more such examples, such as collaborations between physicists and philosophers of physics (including our very own Eric), biologists and philosophers of biology such as yourself, and the list goes on and on. True, not all philosophers are onboard with the idea that philosophers should actively engage with other disciplines, but I guess we are slowly but surely becoming more and more numerous!

    Like

  6. Roberta L. Millstein Avatar

    Here at UC Davis, our philosophy of biology lab group has also had some very good and regular interactions not only with biologists on campus, but also biologists living in the Bay Area more generally, e.g., Michael Ghiselin, Brent Mishler, Joan Roughgarden, Kevin Padian, Nathan Rank, Elizabeth Dahlhoff (thanks very much to all!!). Some of them, particularly Ghiselin and Mishler, have been involved with philosophers of biology for quite some time.
    You’re right that not all philosophers of science see such practices as good. I can’t tell which way the field is trending overall — I hope you’re right that it’s increasing. And perhaps we can help dispel the idea that philosophy is purely an armchair endeavor, which is surely part of the image problem.

    Like

  7. Ehud Avatar
    Ehud

    I say, get to them when they are young… At Tel-Aviv we have great success with biology PhD students who come to our graduate seminars, attend our group meeting, etc. When these students apply for fellowships and they like they sometimes try to propose collaborations with us, and try to get their biology PIs on board.
    We also have a double major (BA) program in philosophy and biology aimed at people interested in consciousness. I think this a great idea. I found interacting with the people running the program and with the students rewarding.

    Like

  8. Roberta L. Millstein Avatar

    Ehud, those are really good suggestions, thanks.

    Like

Leave a comment