Steven Hawking Declares Philosophy is Dead – But is it really?

By | April 17, 2011

In the opening paragraphs of their recent book on scientific cosmology, The Grand Design, Steven Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow make the declaration that science, not philosophy, is the agent of our quest for knowledge. But having made this reasonable assertion, they push further by declaring that “philosophy is dead.”

As an unqualified general statement about all philosophy, this is a very questionable statement; but even more surprisingly, the authors show by their theorizing in the book that a form of philosophy that surely is not dead; namely philosophy as done by scientists themselves.

Steven Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow open their book, with these inspiring words:

“..humans are a curious species. We wonder, we seek answers. Living in this vast world that is by turns kind and cruel, and gazing at the immense heavens above, people have always asked a multitude of questions: How can we understand the world in which we find ourselves? How does the universe behave? What is the nature of reality? Where did all this come from? Did the universe need a creator?”

Then they make some surprising remarks, disparaging philosophy:

“Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead. Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics.”

Following this they offer their view that “scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”

They conclude their opening remarks by stating the purpose of their book:

“The purpose of this book is to give the answers that are suggested by recent discoveries and theoretical advances. They lead us to a new picture of the universe and our place in it that is very different from the traditional one, and different even from the picture we might have painted just a decade or two ago.”

The remark that “philosophy is dead” reads like a categorical statement. Many readers have been surprised that the authors did not qualify this claim; e.g., aspects of traditional philosophy are no longer relevant, such as speculative metaphysics. Surely the authors are aware that there remain many aspects of philosophy that are not entirely dead: e.g. ethics, philosophy of religion, of science, of mind, political philosophy, and such.

The authors hint as to what they might have in mind by the “philosophy is dead” statement when they follow with the statement that “philosophy has not kept up with developments in science.” This helps a little to clarify their disenchantment with philosophy, but it seems that here this is another questionable claim on their part. First, it is not clear what one could mean by a ‘blanket’ statement regarding all of philosophy. Philosophy, like the science, is comprised of a variety of people and intellectual activity. It may be true that some people who call themselves ‘philosophers’ have not kept up with developments in contemporary science; but some most assuredly have: e.g., those philosophers working in the philosophy of science, e.g. Adolph Grunbaum and Victor Stenger in physics, Daniel Dennett in evolutionary biology and in the cognitive sciences. So, at the very least, Hawking and Mlodinow should have qualified their claim that “philosophy has not kept up with developments in the sciences” to read instead that some philosophers have not kept up with developments in the sciences.

Most of us can agree that “scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.” Surely with respect to new discoveries and knowledge of nature and culture, science leads the way. One does not have to embrace a form of ‘scientism’ to agree with this statement. But this statement does not require that one reject all philosophical work as irrelevant to the quest for knowledge that the sciences represent. There remains a role for philosophers, even if it is only the secondary role of clarifying, analyzing, interpreting, and evaluating some of the results of scientific discoveries and theories.

But the more interesting criticism of the authors disparagement of philosophy comes when we notice that, after declaring that philosophy is dead, they turn around and give us a good dose of ‘philosophy’ as they present “a new picture of the universe and our place in it that is very different from the traditional one, and different even from the picture we might have painted just a decade or two ago.” This “new picture” of reality is not one which they develop on strictly scientific grounds, but involves the sort of inference and extrapolation that many would call philosophical thought.

It is easy to find selections in the book which show that the authors engage in drawing inferences, theorizing, and extrapolating as they give us an alternative picture of reality. Can these activities that extend beyond science proper be interpreted as a philosophical activity of sorts?

Admittedly, scientists can draw inferences from their data, make interpretations and theorize without necessarily having it be cases of philosophical speculation. I don’t assume that every time that Hawking and Mlodinow make interpretations or theorize from their data and observations they are engaging in philosophy. But some of their theorizing and extrapolations resemble the activity of philosophy: interpretation, theorizing, and going beyond the data of science to draw more extensive conclusions.

Let’s consider some of what they write. They adopt what they call a theory of perceptual experience which they call “model-dependent realism” in which the world that we perceive results when “our brains interpret the input from our sensory organs by making a model of the real world.” From this they conclude that we don’t observe a world independent of the interpretative structure of our brain:

“There is no way to remove the observer – us – from our perception of the world, which is created through our sensory processing and through the way we think and reason. Our perception – and the observations upon which our theories are based — are shaped by a kind of lens, the interpretive structure of our human brains.”

They may think that this ‘theory’ is just a straight extrapolation from the facts of the brain processes underlying perception, but this ‘theory’ has resemblance to an epistemological theory in philosophy; e.g. a Kantian analysis of the phenomena of experience. Moreover, the fact that one can draw alternative inferences from the facts of those brain processes consistent with a common-sense realism is further indication that the authors advance a philosophical theory regarding perceptual experience.

Their philosophical position – an epistemological position – is underlined when they suggest a skeptical view of the possibility of having an undistorted view of reality. They raise the questions: “Do we really have reason to believe that our objective reality exists? What is the true, undistorted view of reality?” That there answer is a negative one is implied by their use of the goldfish bowl analogy: as the goldfish inside the fish bowl have a distorted view of the world outside the fish bowl, so we have a view of the external world which is distorted by our sense faculties and brain processing.

“Do we really have reason to believe that our objective reality exists — the curved gold fish bowl analogy — What is the true, undistorted view of reality?”

What they write concerning “scientific determinism” is another case in point.

“[The book assumes] the concept of scientific determinism…. There are no exceptions to the laws of nature. …we are no more than biological machines and free will is just an illusion.”

It is probably true that all scientists hold to the view that there are no exceptions to the laws of nature; but it not true that all scientists and philosophers of science infer from this a philosophical determinism which denies that “free will is just an illusion.” when one means by ‘free will’ the ability to make choices and realize some freedom of action. To think otherwise is to adopt a particular philosophical interpretation of ‘free will’ as a special faculty of mind which is not affected by the laws of nature. An alternative philosophical position is one that sees ‘scientific determinism’ to be compatible with our ordinary sense of freedom and choice. One can recognize the importance of our biological ‘machinery’ and yet see humans as more than automatons or mere biological machines. To reject this compatibilist position , as the authors do, is to take a philosophical position on the issues of freedom and determinism.

When they take up the question of alternative models of reality, the authors surely appear to engage a philosophy of science:

[Consider two models: (1) the world is only a few thousand years old or (2) the world is 13.7 billions years old] One theory may be more useful, but “neither model can be said to be more real than the other. A model is a good model if it is elegant; contains few arbitrary or adjustable elements; agrees with and explains all existing observations; makes detailed predictions about future observations that can disprove or falsify the model if they’re not borne out.”

In short, they apply criteria to evaluate competing models of reality. But when they do this, they are not doing science, but they are doing something ordinarily done by philosophers of science.

Finally, we find the abstract theories of the universe which the authors affirm, theories which certainly have the look of a scientifically-based metaphysics.

“We create history by our observation, rather than history creating us.”

“The idea that the universe does not have a unique observer-independent history might seem to conflict with certain facts that we know.”

“The universe does not have a just a single existence or history, but rather every possible version of the universe exists simultaneously in what is called quantum super-position.”

“The histories that contribute to the Feynman sum don’t have an independent existence, but depend on what is being measured. We create history by our observation, rather than history creating us. The idea that the universe does not have a unique observer-independent history might seem to conflict with certain facts we know.”

It is obvious that the authors find a scientific basis (quantum physics, scientific cosmology) for these surprising theories of reality. But the thinking that draws the theories surely is a close kin to philosophical thought.

In conclusion, philosophy is not dead but very much alive when we look for the right forms of philosophy. And some of the more interesting type of philosophy is being done by scientists themselves [1], including the authors of The Grand Design.


[1] Contemporary scientists who have done very impressive philosophical work include Taner Edis, The Ghost in the Universe (philosophy of religion, ..of physics, .. of evolutionary biology), Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate (philosophy of mind, epistemology, social philosophy), and Douglas Hofstadter, I Am A Strange Loop, (philosophy of mind, of self).

50 thoughts on “Steven Hawking Declares Philosophy is Dead – But is it really?

  1. Edgardo Girsh

    Awesome article, you have pointed out a bunch of fantastic points, I likewise believe this is a very great website.

  2. how to lose weight

    I just recently opened a pack of clenbuterol for weight loss and noticed all the pills were orange. I always rememebered them being white tabs. The package is written in Japanese and the only english writing on the pack says clenbuterol..

  3. Davjdag

    I don’t see how Philosophy could be wholly dead unless it is fundamentally impossible for colleagues on the bleeding edge of science to disagree with one another, which makes Hawkings’ claim seem to be out of desire to provoke debate, or out of pretentiousness towards and/or frustration with self-inflated philosophers. The only point I take issue with in this article is the notion that there is any basis for belief in free will other than “I just really feel like it exists”. Of course there’s no doubt I could learn more on the debate. Great article!

  4. dubai escorts

    Hi All,. . I would be truly grateful to you, if you could please let us know the authorized Travel Agency by Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia – New Delhi to proceed for my Business Visit Visa Stamping.. . Talmeez.

  5. super real

    Shares from the company are anticipated to start out trading on Wednesday around the
    Nasdaq under the symbol “HLSS super real but, the primary question that arises this is, “is it
    possible to eat good and healthy while spending less.

  6. purchase testosterone online

    DIet and normal workout haven’t been enough to shed a couple inches and tone up a bit. Saw some fat burners at Walmart and just wondered if anyone had tried one/several and which one worked best? Starting a better diet and INSANITY and would like to see some better results. The only stuff I have used were Dbol and Winstrol, but because of the job I have, I have to stay away from them now. Any suggestions/helpful info would be greatly appreciated!.

  7. Eugene Charter Service

    I’d like to thank you for the efforts you’ve
    put in penning this blog. I really hope to view the same high-grade content from you later
    on as well. In fact, your creative writing abilities has motivated me to get my own website now ;)

  8. AndrewO

    Hi, i’m going to buy legal steroids, what do you think about prohormones? Worth a try? I saw decca at online store, does it work like illegal deca durabolin? Don’t want to spam links here, just search in goolge for – prohormones factory – and tell me what do you think about legal steroids they provide.

  9. trekstor ebook reader test

    ebook reader test
    Hey outstanding website! Does running a blog such as this take a large amount
    of work? I have very little expertise in programming but I was hoping
    to start my own blog in the near future. Anyways, if you have any recommendations or techniques for new blog
    owners please share. I understand this is off topic however I simply
    needed to ask. Thank you! ebook reader test

  10. Tameika Lupinacci

    I currently am running two blogs, one is for design & development and I have a pagerank of 4 on it and I have loads of good articles. . And I have another blog where I have rants, health tips and photography.. . Should I merge them or should I keep it seperate?. and Happy New Year!

  11. рак вторая стадия

    Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is a very well written article. I?ll be sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful information. Thanks for the post. I?ll definitely return. Hey, you used to write excellent, but the last several posts have been kinda boring?K I miss your great writings. Past few posts are just a little out of track! come on!

  12. not fake

    For students who are in public places service to make on-time payments for your time period of decade will possess the remainder of the debt erased after decade not
    fake and don’t believe declaring bankruptcy can conserve
    this person.

  13. เกมส์เล่น2คน

    Hey superb blog! Does running a blog like this take
    a large amount of work? I have very little understanding of programming but
    I had been hoping to start my own blog in the near future.
    Anyhow, if you have any recommendations or techniques for new
    blog owners please share. I understand this is off subject but I just had to ask.
    Thank you!

  14. WalterTymn

    Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as though you relied on the video to make your point. You clearly know what youre talking about, why throw away your intelligence on just posting videos to your blog when you could be giving us something enlightening to read?

  15. wireless spy cam

    Ιt’s ɑctually a great and helpful piece of info.
    Ι am glad that yօu simply shared tҺis usеful іnformation աith us.
    Ρlease stay us uр to date liike thіs. Thank yoս fօr sharing.

  16. livrare pizza sector 1

    What’s up everybody, here every one is sharing such knowledge, therefore it’s fastidious to read this website, and I
    used to pay a quick visit this webpage all the time.

  17. Mei

    Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to say that I’ve
    really enjoyed surfing around your blog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!

  18. http://www.spycameraexpert.Com/

    Aw, this waѕ aaո exceptionally njce post. Finding tɦе time
    anɗ actual effort tߋ create a veгy goood article… Ьut whɑt ϲan I sɑy… I hesitate a աhole
    lot aոd neνer ѕeem to gеt nearly anythiոg done.

  19. raskrutka-besplatno

    What are the steps to starting an adult porn website?. Do you have to go to school to lean web designing or is there another rout i can take that dosen’t involve a lot of money?.

  20. Emery

    That’s 5 1 and Americans are coping with diabetes and insulin problems.
    Cuts or bruises take a longer time to cure and there is minimal sensitivity within the limbs.
    The above food plan is to get a research purpose only.


    Hey I kոow thіs is off topic buut ӏ աas wondering іf yyou
    kneա of аny widgets ӏ сould add too my blog thаt automatically tweet my ոewest twitter updates.
    Ӏ’ve been lookinǥ for а plug-in liƙe this for ԛuite ѕome time anɗ wɑs
    hoping maybe yoս woսld havе sοme experience աith somethinց liκе this.
    Pleaѕe let me know іf you гun into aոything.
    I truly enjuoy reading youг blog andd Ι lօoк forward to yoսr new updates.

  22. Garcinia Cambogia Reviews

    I’m amazed, I must say. Seldom do I encounter a
    blog that’s both educative and entertaining, and without a doubt,
    you have hit the nail on the head. The issue is something which not enough people are speaking intelligently about.
    Now i’m very happy that I found this in my hunt for something relating to

  23. garcinia cambogia extract how it works

    Hey there this is kind of of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code
    with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding expertise so I wanted to get advice from someone with experience.
    Any help would be enormously appreciated!

  24. cheap twitter followers

    When I initially left a comment I appear to have clicked on the -Notify me when new comments are added- checkbox and from now on each
    time a comment is added I get 4 emails with
    the same comment. Perhaps there is an easy method you are able
    to remove me from that service? Kudos!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *