Science and Philosophy: A Love-Hate Relationship

Sebastian De Haro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-019-09619-2

2020-06-02

Abstract:In this paper I review the problematic relationship between science and philosophy; in particular, I will address the question of whether science needs philosophy, and I will offer some positive perspectives that should be helpful in developing a synergetic relationship between the two. I will review three lines of reasoning often employed in arguing that philosophy is useless for science: a) philosophy's death diagnosis ('philosophy is dead'); b) the historic-agnostic argument/challenge "show me examples where philosophy has been useful for science, for I don't know of any"; c) the division of property argument (or: philosophy and science have different subject matters, therefore philosophy is useless for science). These arguments will be countered with three contentions to the effect that the natural sciences need philosophy. I will: a) point to the fallacy of anti-philosophicalism (or: 'in order to deny the need for philosophy, one must do philosophy') and examine the role of paradigms and presuppositions (or: why science can't live without philosophy); b) point out why the historical argument fails (in an example from quantum mechanics, alive and kicking); c) briefly sketch some domains of intersection of science and philosophy and how the two can have mutual synergy. I will conclude with some implications of this synergetic relationship between science and philosophy for the liberal arts and sciences.

History and Philosophy of Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The main issue this paper attempts to address is the relationship between science and philosophy, particularly exploring whether natural science needs philosophy. The author, Sebastian de Haro, refutes the view that science does not need philosophy from three aspects and argues for the importance of philosophy in the development of science. Specifically:

1. **Refutation of Anti-Philosophy Views**:
- The author first discusses several common arguments against the usefulness of philosophy to science, including the claims that philosophy is dead, that historically philosophy has been useless to science, and that the objects and methods of study in science and philosophy are different.
- Subsequently, the author refutes these arguments one by one, pointing out that even those who claim philosophy is useless must engage in philosophical reasoning to argue this point, thus falling into self-contradiction.

2. **The Necessity of Philosophy for Science**:
- The author starts from Thomas Kuhn's paradigm theory of scientific development, illustrating that the formation of any scientific paradigm is inseparable from a series of presuppositions, which are philosophical in nature.
- The basic assumptions in scientific research, the way instruments are used, research traditions, shared values, and views on which questions are the focus of science are all elements that constitute a paradigm, and these elements can be vastly different under different paradigms.
- Therefore, philosophy is not only the foundation of scientific research but also crucial for constructing scientific theoretical frameworks.

3. **Synergy Between Science and Philosophy**:
- Finally, the author emphasizes the mutually reinforcing relationship between science and philosophy and explores the significance of this relationship for the education of both the humanities and natural sciences.

In summary, this paper aims to demonstrate that philosophy is not only important to science but that there is a necessary synergistic effect between the two.