Science vs Philosophy?

I was hooked in quickly by this conversation featuring astrophysicist Adam Frank, neuroscientist Lisa Feldman Barrett, and biologist Michael Levin. Barrett, the neuroscientist, had this to say:

“I’m not sure that materialism is actually the culprit here. … For a long time, the main alternatives to traditional realism were idealism. This is the idea that reality is all in your head. Empiricism is the idea that we can only study what we can sense and we shouldn’t even be making metaphysical um assumptions. But there is a third option which is the idea that there is a single reality, but that reality exists in relation to some perspective. So it’s inherently perspectival. And this is the notion of relational realism. It’s the belief that reality consists of the relations between interacting signals that can constrain or enhance one another.”

And I absolutely agree. All life is interrelated. We cannot understand reality until we grasp the complex interactions between biological organisms and their environments. Those interactions shape how living beings function, evolve, and adapt in a changing world. Rather than the universe being created for humans, humans are just one of millions of living things shaped by the environment. This insight is validated by common ancestry, as our shared DNA demonstrates, and our dependance on the biosphere for our survival and well-being.

10 thoughts on “Science vs Philosophy?”

  1. Interesting article.
    Regarding what you discuss or describe in your post, what are your thoughts about the uniting of various intellectual and metaphysical beliefs (i.e. eclectic spirituality)? If one cannot understand reality without understanding the relationship between all living beings and their shared environments, then mustn’t one study many religious, spiritual, or esoteric paths in order to attain greater harmony or clarity?
    Sincerely,
    Matthew Pungitore
    (Writer. Poet. Painter.)

    1. There is much to be learned in beliefs from many different cultures and disciplines. To name two non-Western belief systems, I admire the insights of Taoism and Buddhism. Their emphasis on interrelatedness and accepting and adapting blend in well within Stoicism.

  2. Fantastic insights on relational realism here.
    I agree that we cannot truly understand reality without looking at the full network of biological interactions

  3. Except, I believe and have glimpsed from time to time, that there is a reality beyond relativism. It is a reality that doesn’t depend on anything. It is peaceful, and full of compassion and love. It dwells inside every human being, and is waiting patiently to be discovered.

    1. There’s much to appreciate about nature’s deep connections. No one truly grasps it. At the least, knowing that we know so little about the complexity of life should make us cautious about making changes and doing harm.

Leave a Reply