Hawking: Philosophy is Dead and has been replaced by Physics. God Never existed and now we have M-theory

[DebChris]

To say there is no philosophy is to say there is no wisdom.

Does Hawking actually wish to argue that the only wisdom possible is in science.

Well, that would make fools of the rest of us, and a fool of Hawking when he is not thinking science.

Exactly.
Abstract or higher order thinking is discounted when philosophy is discounted.
The wisdom that comes from experience is also discounted.
I would say it even limits scientific inquiry since philosophy opens the mind to questioning.
Questioning leads to scientific exploration.

 

[Tomdstone]

The most powerful objection to M-theory is that it violates the principle of parsimony. Why postulate more than one universe?

Because Kolmogorov complexity shows that a multiverse satisfies the principle of parsimony better than a single universe.

 

[thinkandmull]

Can Hawkings refute the First Way?

 

[Tomdstone]

Can Hawkings refute the First Way?

I suppose he might say that the universe was uncaused.

 

[Tomdstone]

Does Hawking actually wish to argue that the only wisdom possible is in science.

Well, that would make fools of the rest of us, and a fool of Hawking when he is not thinking science.

Strawman argument. I suppose that Hawking is saying that the advances in our recent understanding of the universe have come mostly from science, and not so much from philosophy. Generally, the idea is that there has been no progress in philosophy since philosophers today wrestle with the exact same problems the ancient Greek or ancient pre-Socratic philosophers did.
Do you see any progress in philosophy over the last century?
I see:
Post-modernism
Radical feminism
Deconstructionism, Social Constructivism, post-structuralism, sociology of scientific knowledge.
New ethical questions arising from advances in technology, such as the ethics of drone warfare, climate change, carbon emissions, fake or slanted news, stem cell research, etc.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Do you see any progress in philosophy over the last century?

Philosophy is not a science and therefore does not require progress of discovery of the scientific type…

What it requires is progress in wisdom. There has been little progress in wisdom because philosophy has degenerated. The respect for philosophy is at an all time low, due in part to the fact that science has usurped the all that respect for itself. Stephen Hawking is one such scientist who has contributed to this decline of respect for wisdom, and has been guilty of the silliest conclusions in favor of science over philosophy.

 

[inocente]

Does Hawking actually wish to argue that the only wisdom possible is in science.

Please cite where he says that.

M-theory is dreamy wish-fulfillment … a way of getting rid of God.

After all, it was dreamed up by an atheist.

I see that M-Theory was first conjectured by Edward Witten, but found no record of him saying what he believes. Please cite where he says he’s an atheist.

Stephen Hawking is one such scientist who has contributed to this decline of respect for wisdom, and has been guilty of the silliest conclusions in favor of science over philosophy.

Thing is, Hawking made a rational argument and no one has even attempted to make a rational rebuttal. There have been attacks on his character and expressions of opinions about what he didn’t say, but Hawking can’t be blamed if this thread is a philosophy-free zone.

 

[GEddie]

Philosophy is not a science and therefore does not require progress of discovery of the scientific type…

What it requires is progress in wisdom. There has been little progress in wisdom because philosophy has degenerated. The respect for philosophy is at an all time low, due in part to the fact that science has usurped the all that respect for itself. Stephen Hawking is one such scientist who has contributed to this decline of respect for wisdom, and has been guilty of the silliest conclusions in favor of science over philosophy.

Maybe.

But ISTM that philosophical modernism should share some of the blame. Modern philosophers don’t exude a sense of wisdom.

I mean, in eight-hundred years the Western world has gone from Aquinas, to Descartes, to …existentialism???

ICXC NIKA

 

[inocente]

Can Hawking-]s/-] refute the First Way?

Ask him - prof.hawking@damtp

 

[inocente]

I mean, in six-hundred years the Western world has gone from Aquinas, to Descartes, to …existentialism???

Yes, cool isn’t it.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Maybe.

But ISTM that philosophical modernism should share some of the blame. Modern philosophers don’t exude a sense of wisdom.

I mean, in eight-hundred years the Western world has gone from Aquinas, to Descartes, to …existentialism???

ICXC NIKA

Oh, I agree entirely with this. People don’t have respect for philosophy for many reasons, one of which is the disrepute it has with scientists. I don’t think this can be denied. The other reason is the disunity of philosophical systems which suffers from the same tragic collapse of Lutheranism into thousands of competing Protestant sects. Its difficult to find a coherent philosophy when incoherence rules the day.

But as you say, Philosophy has not held its head up high since Aquinas, and that largely due to the dominance of empiricism that has advanced constantly and ruthlessly since the days of Hume.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Please cite where he says that.

I see that M-Theory was first conjectured by Edward Witten, but found no record of him saying what he believes. Please cite where he says he’s an atheist.

Witten may be the originator, but Hawking is identified as the originator in the public mind.

There is no question that Hawking is an atheist.

I have no idea what Witten is, or even whether Witten has an idea of what he is.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Yes, cool isn’t it.

Why is it cool? Are you an existentialist?

Why wasn’t Aquinas also an existentialist?

 

[o_mlly]

…] He claims he is providing what Einstein wanted to but failed - an explanation of everything. Here is a little review: youtube.com/watch?v=UZpfCNT_Opc

What’s your take?

Based on this man’s logic, having never met him, it is more correct for me to say, “There is NO Hawkings!” than to say “There is no God.”

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Based on this man’s logic, having never met him, it is more correct for me to say, “There is NO Hawkings!” than to say “There is no God.”

Werner Heisenberg, Nobel Laureate in Physics:

“The first gulp from the glass of the natural sciences will turn you into an atheist. But at the bottom of the glass, God is waiting for you.”

 

[tonyrey]

The most powerful objection to M-theory is that it violates the principle of parsimony. Why postulate more than one universe?

Please justify that assertion.

 

[Tomdstone]

Please justify that assertion.

The higher level multiverses are simpler because they eliminate the need to specify initial conditions and physical constants.

 

[Aloysium]

The higher level multiverses are simpler because they eliminate the need to specify initial conditions and physical constants.

How do the physical constants come into being?

 

[Tomdstone]

How do the physical constants come into being?

They are known from experiment. The exact numerical value of dimensional physical constants is going to depend on the units you are using.

 

[inocente]

Witten may be the originator, but Hawking is identified as the originator in the public mind.

There is no question that Hawking is an atheist.

I have no idea what Witten is, or even whether Witten has an idea of what he is.

Good of you to admit you invented the whole thing.

Why is it cool? Are you an existentialist?

Because its philosophy, based on rational argument. C.f. some posts on this thread.