Stephen Hawking’s reasoning, “Philosophy Is Dead.”

Stephen Hawking’s reasoning, “Philosophy Is Dead.”

 Stephen Hawking is one of the renown physicists and the author of “A Brief History of Time,” who, when delivering his speech in the Google Zeitgeist Conference that was held in Hertfordshire, declared that philosophy was dead. Notably, the allegations that the nature of the universe cannot be determined in the absence of hard data like the one that was being retrieved from the Large Hadron Collider and space research. Hawking claimed that philosophy is dead and that it is a traditional view of nature and that the new world should be controlled by science, which philosophers don’t want to recognize and emphasis. Additionally, he claimed that scientist is the leaders in the inventories as well as discoveries in search of more knowledge and that the theories from the philosophers only lead to a different direction thus irrelevant to knowledge adventure.

Markedly, Hawking proposed that science has been in the science has been in use and progress since the 17^th century when Einstein was coming up and unifying the theories and that of the Google earth. Still, all needed more data to be collected and prove it. More so, he declared that the knowledge is based and grounded on ordinary science; thus, philosophy misses the science and therefore said that it was dead and nature can as well reject it. The claim that modern philosophers have not been in the upkeep with modern science, they, therefore, deviate from knowledge as science is the source of knowledge and discoveries. In a nutshell, Hawking’s claim was that continued neglect by the modern philosophers on natural science leads them to a verge of irrelevance.

Criticisms and Arguments

Hawking argued that if one does not belong to the same sense of thought and theoretical set of disciplines, then he is rendered irrelevant to the present survival and existence. The fact that the philosophers did not use modern technology, then, they were leading to a point where philosophy is going to be dead. Notably, Hawking says that the problem with philosophy was unable to keep track of the development that had taken place in physics. Furthermore, he goes on. He states that the philosophers had as well failed physicists like Einstein by not being able to invent new theories, and instead, they only concentrated on writing about the philosophy in physics. Hawking’s harshness towards the philosophers was also personal, considering that the philosophers were unkind to him as they called him a nominalist, realist as well as positivist.

This was seen as the primary reason as to why he decided to respond to the philosophers by claiming that they were well as “dead.” Notably, this shows that he did not take into consideration detailed research on the background of his critics and where they were derived from. Noticeably, this is evident where he fails to give proof to the facts that he provides against the philosophers. On the points and statements that he makes against the philosophers, Hawking fails to give a clear and well-detailed explanation of fact on the death of the philosophy. In such a matter that touches so many events that had been set and two fields that had experienced a great relationship in the future, he was not right to be bringing personal perception with such a considerable intensity.

Hawking fails by large to recognize the part that philosophy has played in the field of science since he probably did not carry out on the background research on the philosophy of science. Noticeably, he was talking regarding the wrong philosophers or else picked the wrong ideas about his discussion of philosophy dismissal. The complete termination is scientifically irrelevant as it fails to recognize some facts that science was in existence since the early 17^th century and even more development in the 12^th century with the growth in physics such as relativity and quantum mechanics. That shows that philosophy, as it was used in the traditional times the same, is still applicable at this present moment since the same philosophy that was being applied in the past still exists as and the current philosophers who are well-informed plays and essential role in the contemporary scientific and physic developments.

Notably, science has always put into consideration significant components of philosophy as the points of theory construction, valid, interference, causality, hypothesis testing, among many others. Notably, at some point at a certain speculative point, when the scientist ignores the information and guidance that they are offered by the philosophers who are well informed, only risk downfall during the executions of their work. Notably, science has tremendously achieved some of its advances by just venturing into the limits beyond just science by changing the line of thought. In a nutshell, philosophy has always provided reliable and robust information in support of scientific developments and interventions. The solutions that were solved by the use of philosophy still helps as in case of any need of information; the only background research is needed; philosophy always provides the data, and they can still help to solve the present interventions.

Noticeably, scientists going beyond in the search for more information and theoretical commitments that go beyond just empirical testing is a great prove that philosophy is reliable and that it attributes physical laws and that scientific truth that at some point is ignored or taken for granted. Furthermore, scientific theories are determined by the evidence that they carry with them in hand; therefore, this cannot be ignored that they carry an auxiliary hypothesis that explains its background or one that is negotiable. Notably, this helps in showing the way there has always been the interrelationship between philosophy and science, how they have always worked together in helping deliver the best on each one’s side of view, interventions, and discoveries.

Notably, Hawking puts into consideration two theories; the M theory that deals with multiple dimensions that makes up the ultimate reality beyond appearances despite the perception of the other spatio-temporary world. The other theory is that of the theory of everything that favors kind of optimistic types. Closely, Hawking takes an approach that allows the effect of observation on a certain object, but despite that, one should retain the respect to the objective scientific truth. Through this, Hawking tries to drift the thinking that the philosophers should not think in any other way apart from that of science. All that he wants to mean is that all that the philosophers think and act upon should all be based on the scientific truth of finding. However, every person that lives has a free will on which path to follow in proving his facts, and having different aspects about something should not be considered irrelevant as what everyone does is always relevant in his own way, and it can also be of importance on those who oppose it. Evidently, Hawking uses philosophical sources even in his writing, but only out of pretense ignore the part philosophy impacts his work.

Clarificatory

            In a nutshell, philosophy is an important element in the development and present evolution of things, especially in the science filed. Nevertheless, at some point, Hawking was having a certain view that in my consideration can be true but not through the way he represented the criticism.  By putting into consideration the quality of the philosophers, we can agree that during the early years, philosophy could be highly resourceful, but with time, following the rise, many philosophers make philosophy lack originality. Notably, this makes a point of Hawking that philosophy is dying into consideration by meaning that it cannot be relied upon as it used to be in the past.

Nevertheless, Hawking was not right to criticize alone by also recognize that there have been so many other changes that have taken place from the educational point of view and rise in mathematical, physics methods of invention and integration in general. Hawking should also have considered that philosophy works with scientific and physics studies to maintain what had been established both in the past when physics highly relied on philosophy. Nevertheless, the philosophers should always try to maintain originality and make sure that there is no conflict of interest between them and the scientists, especially in the discovery of more physics and technology.