[ExI] Can philosophers produce scientific knowledge?

Dan TheBookMan danust2012 at gmail.com
Sat May 8 05:03:24 UTC 2021

> On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 10:30 AM Dan TheBookMan via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/18972/1/Pradeu-Lemoine-Khelfaoui-Gingras_Philosophy%20in%20Science_Online%20version.pdf
[snip of abstract to the above paper]
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 3:23 PM Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've always considered the difference between scientific and philosophical claims to be experimental falsifiability.
> Is that not right?

Falsifiability is often used to draw a line between science and
everything else. I'm not sure it works that well. (Why? There is where
it might be good to look at philosophy of science rather than just
throwing around slogans.:) Anyhow, the authors come to the conclusion
'that philosophy and science belong to a continuum than to the view
that they are different activities.' (p30)

Anyhow, the issue would be whether a given claim -- wherever it comes
from -- is falsifiable and the broader context. Why would seem at all
odd that philosophers, especially ones working closely with
scientists, might not come up with claims that might advance science
-- e.g., that might suggest specific research like field work or lab



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list