Theoretical philosophy that ignores empirical data fails to advance human knowledge.

Conceptual and empirical inquiry overlap; philosophy requires evidence to yield meaningful truth.

Merging philosophical analysis with scientific research creates a unified, evidence-based discipline.

In an interview for the Undergraduate Philosophy Journal of Australasia in 2022, Australian philosopher Kim Sterelny (my wife's PhD advisor and one of my PhD supervisors) was asked about his most controversial view. His answer:

"Probably the view that most a priori philosophy is a complete waste of time. Take all the metaphysical stuff on the nature of grounding—that is just killing trees for no good reason. Complete and utter f*****g waste of time. A good deal of a priori philosophy is like that, and in my view, a waste of space. Does that do for controversial?"

"Probably the view that most a priori philosophy is a complete waste of time. Take all the metaphysical stuff on the nature of grounding—that is just killing trees for no good reason. Complete and utter f*****g waste of time. A good deal of a priori philosophy is like that, and in my view, a waste of space. Does that do for controversial?"

Nevertheless, his comments will certainly strike some readers as quite radical. So let’s look at how he justifies his position in response to the interviewer:

What do you think separates philosophy and the sciences? Do you think that there are questions currently considered to be in the realm of philosophy that in fact need to be addressed by people from other disciplines as well? Well, I’m a radical on this. I don’t think there’s a sharp distinction between philosophy and science.

What do you........

© Psychology Today