The relationship between Science and Philosophy

[Dolorian]

When it comes to the relationship between Philosophy and Theology a popular way of describing this relationship is as follows:

"Philosophy is the handmaiden of Theology; Philosophy helps elucidate Theology and prevents it from falling into superstition"

But of course, we can agree that Theology is bunk, so would you agree with a similar statement but with regards to Philosophy and Science?

"Philosophy is the handmaiden of Science; Philosophy helps elucidate Science and prevents it from falling into pseudoscience"

Would you agree with that assessment? Why, why not?

[bennyboy]

I think science is sufficient in itself but for one thing-- that it may be redefined someday. When any appeal to academic authority becomes an acceptable alternative to observation and careful experiementation, and is still called "Science," then philosophy (hopefully) will be there wagging its finger-- reminding us that there's nothing new under the sun if we aren't willing to turn over every stone.

[Mystic]

I don't agree with it.

[Mudhammam]

I certainly wouldn't displace philosophy as the handmaiden of science. Philosophy is rather the nurturing mother that allowed science to flourish, continuing to offer her wisdom and guidance. Science is the meticulous and prestigious daughter; theology is the son, a much older, poor, rambunctious, drunkard.

[JesusHChrist]

Theology is more the inbred, dim witted second cousin who had a lobotomy so long ago no-one remembers when

[g0sU]

"Philosophy is the handmaiden of Science; Philosophy helps elucidate Science and prevents it from falling into pseudoscience"

Would you agree with that assessment? Why, why not?

Science and Pseudoscience are by definition non-overlapping. And philosophy is not needed either to draw the line between the two, because the general consensus amongst peers in a paticular field does that.

cheers

[bennyboy]

Science and Pseudoscience are by definition non-overlapping. And philosophy is not needed either to draw the line between the two, because the general consensus amongst peers in a paticular field does that.

cheers

They are non-overlapping by definition, but they themselves are not guaranteed always to be defined as we define them now. Consensus, if made by idiots, can be the greatest enemy of truth. So-- what's the chance that idiots will never get the chance to rebrand the word "science" in dangerous and ignorant ways?

I'd say zero. When science is treated as an institution rather than a collection of carefully-chosen philosophical assumptions and positions, it will be dead. Don't believe me? Look at the American educational system.

[fr0d0]

I think it's the other way around. Philosophy is unrestrained and so weak as to be illogical at times where theology is direct and has to conform to the purpose. Philosophy helps with the mechanics. Philosophy seems to bind theology and science.

[bennyboy]

Philosophy helps with the mechanics. Philosophy seems to bind theology and science.

Only in the sense that a great ship and a makeshift raft are bound together by being enveloped by a great ocean.

[Whateverist]

I'd say that science is the whelp of philosophy.

Or, if you prefer, philosophy is the landed gentry and science is "new money", powerful but lacking perspective and class.