Can Philosophy Build Upon Known Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ~christina~
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Philosophy Science
AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the fundamental distinctions between science and philosophy. Science is characterized by its empirical approach, testing hypotheses against physical evidence, while philosophy relies on reasoning to explore its hypotheses. Scientific theories are grounded in observable phenomena, whereas philosophical theories are shaped by mental frameworks and interpretations. The conversation suggests that philosophy should build upon established scientific knowledge, using known truths about the universe as a foundation for ontological exploration. This approach allows for a more informed and safe theorization about the nature of existence and reality.
Physics news on Phys.org


~christina~ said:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mVW4p6NSrXw&feature=related

The key differences between science and philosophy:

Science tests its hypothesis.
Philosophy reasons its hypothesis.

Scientific Theories reflect the physical evidence.
Philosophical Theories reflect the disposition of mind.
 


I think its more like philosophy should build upon known physics. So we take what we know to be true about the universe and then we can theorise (safely) about what it means from an ontological perspective.
 

Thread 'Status Update by JRMichler'

Just ONCE, I wanted to see a post titled Status Update that was not a blatant, annoying spam post by a new member. So here it is. Today was a good day here in Northern Wisconsin. Fall colors are here, no mosquitos, no deer flies, and mild temperature, so my morning run was unusually nice. Only two meetings today, and both went well. The deer that was road killed just down the road two weeks ago is now fully decomposed, so no more smell. Somebody has a spike buck skull for their...
View full post »
Thread 'RIP George F. Smoot III (1945-2025)'

Thread 'RIP George F. Smoot III (1945-2025)'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Smoot https://physics.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/george-smoot-iii https://apc.u-paris.fr/fr/memory-george-fitzgerald-smoot-iii https://elements.lbl.gov/news/honoring-the-legacy-of-george-smoot/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2006/smoot/facts/ https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200611/nobel.cfm https://inspirehep.net/authors/988263 Structure in the COBE Differential Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps (Astrophysical Journal...
View full post »

Similar threads

In defense of the philosophy of physics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Philosophy of Science: Discussing Maths, Physics, Mind, & AI
Replies
3
Views
3K
More articles like Feynman's Value of Science (1955)?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Which scientists are more successful: Specialists or "Universal Nerds"?
Replies
8
Views
1K
Are true geniuses extinct?
2
Replies
69
Views
5K
Anybody interested in the Philosophy / Sociology of Science?
Replies
17
Views
2K
MHB Science vs Philosophy: What's the Difference?
Replies
4
Views
4K
New to Physics Forums with questions
Replies
2
Views
373
How the Philosophy of Art made me want to become a Physicist
Replies
4
Views
629
Can quantum mechanics be combined with game theory?
Replies
26
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top