Skip to main content

Is Philosophy Dead? Is Science All That Is?



In Epistemics of Divine Reality, I have argued how the empirical approach to knowledge would attempt to jettison metaphysics. In the early 1920s, a group in Vienna called the Vienna Circle tried to annunciate the death of philosophy by founding a school of philosophy called logical positivism. The group was composed of mainly mathematicians, physicists, sociologists and economists, but no professional philosophers. So, their utter dislike of metaphysics can be understood. But, it is interesting that one attempts to overthrow philosophy by constructing a school of philosophy. But, that contradiction in terms is natural to any form of empiricism that seeks to avoid the rational. The Law of Verification that they proposed was what dealt a death-blow to the theory itself. It was itself unverifiable (of course, because the philosophy was not empirical itself). The two World Wars did reveal, if not anything else, this one thing that philosophy was not dead. Nazism might have some evolutionary scientific tinge, but it was a philosophical system after all, and one with disastrous consequences making the best use or misuse of science to further its goals. Nations and people are governed not by the discoveries of science but by philosophies and ideologies that they hold to be rationally true. Logical positivism soon went into the grave.

Recently, Stephen Hawking has been quoted as saying that philosophy is dead having been overthrown by Science. Again, it is a statement by an empiricist scientist against the rational, speculative disciple. But, again, empiricism is itself a philosophical perspective; only, that it fails to fully answer the rational demands of knowledge. If the physicist can’t escape granting eternity to at least the physical and empirical Law of Gravity (though it is not necessitated at all), he, of course, also ought not to refuse acknowledging the eternality of some non-empirical Laws of Logic (which aren’t provable by science, though invoked by it). Philosophy couldn’t be dead after all. However, with all the scientific advancements, discoveries, education, and predictions, it is still worthwhile to ask if philosophy is truly dead. Let’s consider the following:

  1. What is it that still governs politics and legislation in a nation? Is it science or some ideology?
  2. Where do ideas of morality and justice come from?
  3. Where do people get their ideas of rights? Does science tell one that rights are fundamental?
  4. Where do people get the concept of crime and justice? Are the concepts scientifically discovered? Can their truthfulness be determined by science?
  5. Where do people get the concepts that motivate their engagement in charity and welfare work?
  6. Where do people get their ideas of freedom of will, Truth, and validity of knowledge, since science holds to a deterministic view of the universe?
  7. Where does one get the idea of sufficient evidence in order to be able to make a claim as omnisciently negative as the one that “God does not exist”?

Obviously, science is not all that is.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Placebo and the Philosophy of Mind and Matter in Drug Research

A placebo is a non-therapeutic substance administered under the camouflage of medication to deceive patients into believing that they are receiving medications; this done solely for psychological and not for physiological effects. Placebo may usually be used to compare its effects with the effects of other drugs in drug research. Let's take the case of an experiment that tries to establish whether a particular drug, say to treat weariness, is genuine or merely has the effects of a placebo. Suppose 20 candidates are chosen for this experiment. 10 are given the drug and the rest are put on a placebo while they are told that the placebo is a genuine medication. They need to make sure that the deception is well carried on for the success of the experiment. If both the groups make similar improvements after taking the treatments, the new drug seems to only function as a placebo in effect. The basic hypothesis of the placebo raises the question of mind over matter. Of course, this pushes...

Is Water Baptism Necessary Before Partaking in Lord's Supper

"Last Supper" by Giovanni Domenico Tiepolo (1750) Yes, it is. Water baptism identifies one with the redemption work of Jesus Christ, with His death, burial, and resurrection. It is anticipated of visible identification with Christ and His Church. Every person has the personal responsibility to examine him/herself before deciding to partake in the Lord's Table. The Bible makes it clear that those who chose not to be baptized were rejecting the counsel of God (Lk.7:30). In a mixed congregation, it is not possible to always know who is worthy to partake of the Table; however, the minister must encourage only those who have been baptized for remission of sins (not just as a ritual but by faith in Jesus Christ) to partake of the Table. Before Jesus sat down to dip bread in the cup, He washed His disciples' feet. He makes the statement that they are already "washed" and only need feet to be washed. Of course, this may not explicitly/only refer to their baptism, fo...

Reliability, Predictability, and Paul the Octopus

Paul the Octopus has recently become very famous after his predictions for Germany and Spain during the World Cup 2010 came right. The 100% accuracy tag distinguishes him from any other diviner who had attempted a prediction during the World Cup. There were responses and reactions from various people including sportsmen, statesmen, and mathematicians. Whatever, the use of Paul has demonstrated once again that mankind's search for an extra-temporal, psychic foresight has not quelled through the historical calendar returning a decade over this millennium. The question before us is can such predictions as those of Paul be counted on as reliable (in other words, can they be seriously taken as true)? The mathematicians have plumped for chance. It's all a matter of probability, they say ( BBC News ). However, the argument of chance in itself is weak. The mathematics of chance will calculate that the probability of Paul being right seven times out of seven is 1/128. But, the conclusi...