Ever since reading some of Nick Bostrom's works, I find it advisable to be very sceptical when philosophers attempt to deal with mathematical thought.
Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
21–30 of 179 posts
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#22> Bergson emphasised the cultural and technological context in which Einstein formulated relativity and argued that a theory of time that relies on clocks but doesn’t understand their history and significance, is incomplete This is hard to get on board with. A theory of time is incomplete without a history of clocks? Have I misunderstood?
A theory of time is only complete without a history of clocks if you believe a theory of time can be completely physically correct, period. Do you know of any completely physically correct theories?
You wouldn't know if you would
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#23Sorry for Kaku's old age decline, but not gonna waste my time listening to this crank. Has he been officially diagnosed with dementia yet? edit: you are right, I just flew over the article.
This is not Michio Kaku, unless I’m very mistaken.
Kaku is mentioned just once, in a passing remark about an upcoming event. Mentioning him here seems bizarrely out of place.
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#24Perhaps it went over my head but in summary he wanted the scientific process of discovery in physics research to stop because his philosophy couldn't keep up?
Yep. Pretty much. This is a not-uncommon sentiment among philosophers. It's the only way they can cope with the shift in the societal power dynamic that has happened since Newton and Darwin and Einstein and Turing and Bell. Science has subsumed philosophy, and the philosophers really hate that.
But hasn't it always been that way? Copernicus was a revolution to philosophy. Newton was a revolution to philosophy.
Is it just that we're more aware of the current philosophers, who will be forgotten in a century or two? Or is the philosophical opposition actually stronger now?
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#25Perhaps it went over my head but in summary he wanted the scientific process of discovery in physics research to stop because his philosophy couldn't keep up?
Yep. Pretty much. This is a not-uncommon sentiment among philosophers. It's the only way they can cope with the shift in the societal power dynamic that has happened since Newton and Darwin and Einstein and Turing and Bell. Science has subsumed philosophy, and the philosophers really hate that.
Philosophy can approach many questions that currently feel out of the realm of science
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#26TFA is presented as an interview. It's not clear to me who is asking the questions, and who is answering.
Interviewee: Jimena Canales | Historian of science and author of The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, Bergson and the Debate That Changed Our Understanding of Time (2015) as well as Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science (2020).
Interviewer: Alexis Papazoglou | Senior editor for IAI News, the online magazine of the Institute of Art and Ideas, and former philosophy lecturer at Cambridge and Royal Holloway.
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, the hubris of physicists to call their trade a replacement for philosophy exposes the fatal flaw in scientism.
Why is that a fatal flaw?
Because even if you have experimental results in your favor, you still need epistemology to tell you why you can believe the results of the experiments. And you can't derive epistemology from experiments.
Logical positivism tried to do this, and failed. Michael Polanyi's Personal Knowledge pretty much killed logical positivism, because he showed that no scientist is in the fully objective position that was required to set up and evaluate the experiments.
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. Pretty much. This is a not-uncommon sentiment among philosophers. It's the only way they can cope with the shift in the societal power dynamic that has happened since Newton and Darwin and Einstein and Turing and Bell. Science has subsumed philosophy, and the philosophers really hate that.
Philosophy can approach many questions that currently feel out of the realm of science
Like what?
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. Pretty much. This is a not-uncommon sentiment among philosophers. It's the only way they can cope with the shift in the societal power dynamic that has happened since Newton and Darwin and Einstein and Turing and Bell. Science has subsumed philosophy, and the philosophers really hate that.
Philosophy can approach many questions that currently feel out of the realm of science
And say nothing of value about them, but sound smart while they do it ;)
Re: Time Doesn’t Belong to Physics – When Bergson met Einstein
#30> Bergson emphasised the cultural and technological context in which Einstein formulated relativity and argued that a theory of time that relies on clocks but doesn’t understand their history and significance, is incomplete This is hard to get on board with. A theory of time is incomplete without a history of clocks? Have I misunderstood?
A theory of time is only complete without a history of clocks if you believe a theory of time can be completely physically correct, period. Do you know of any completely physically correct theories?
Relativity isn't even about clocks, and is practically difficult to verify with any but the absolute best... its most common applications are related to radiation physics. The only conflict science has with philosophers is its role as a stumbling block for people with high verbal abilities and a belief that they don't have to know anything about the subject they're writing about. If they had the same attitude towards glassblowing or archeology they would have the same results.