For most of its existence, science has only existed as a form of philosophy. While the more scientific aspects of philosophy continuously improved and presented solutions, philosophy as a whole continued to produce nothing of value. Because of this, science began to take on a form of its own, and around a century ago, split off from philosophy. In time, the two became separate entities with few similarities. In current times, science bears as little resemblance to philosophy is it does to religion.
Modern philosophy is a “god of the gaps”, a religion for those with intellectual pretensions. It asks ill-defined questions with little or no actual meaning, and presents useless answers in an overly complicated form. It takes concepts that do not have objective solutions, nor practical meaning, and turns them into jumbled abstractions. It is worthless.
Modern philosophy specifically targets areas that science either has not solved or are unsolvable and of no interest to science. For example: the nature of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ is a popular subject for debate among philosophers, but is this discussion beneficial to anyone? Good and evil are concepts of minimal meaning created by religion and humans’ tendency to justify, they are nothing more than ‘constructive’ and ‘destructive’, but over-complicated to infinity.
If anything, by over-complicating straightforward issues, philosophy is serving as a force of destruction, and an impediment to human progress. If you can offer two equally viable explanations, then you have zero knowledge. This is the very nature of Philosophy. It has zero knowledge, and always will.
Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds. — Richard Feynman
Philosophers have not kept up with modern developments in science. Particularly physics. — Stephen Hawking
Philosophy is a field that, unfortunately, reminds me of that old Woody Allen joke, “those that can’t do, teach, and those that can’t teach, teach gym.” — Lawrence Krauss
This was not always the case, philosophy was once the sole source of progress in the world. Around the time of Aristotle, and with some credit due to Aristotle, concepts such as inductive reasoning and empirical testing began to gain ground. This stands in contrast to figures such as Pluto, who argued that nothing was provable.
While the empirical methods of Aristotle and others continued to evolve–the Greeks and Romans being some of the first to put scientific concepts to extensive practical use–Pluto’s school of thought grew and spread as well. Instead of growing into two separate methods, their ideas become intermingled, and remained that way for hundreds of years onward.
Around the 1800s the two fields began to break off. Science’s realistic and practical grounding could no longer co-exist with the ponderous fluff of philosophy. The divide has only grown larger and more pronounced for the past two hundred years. Unfortunately, philosophy largely retains the prestige it no longer has any right to, and the mindless meanderings of philosophers are extensively promoted and published to this day.
Perversely, many scientists oven today treat philosophy as a legitimate field of reason for questions that lay ‘outside the realm of science’; although many also respect religion in this same way. This is a problem, since nothing lies outside the realm of science. Science is by nature, the study of anything and everything that is quantifiable (that is, anything that matters and is real). Sadly, on issues outside of their specialty, the bulk of scientists are in many ways no more intelligent than the general population.
A chemist may have an excellent understanding of their particular sub-field in chemistry, but be entirely ignorant of all other types of science. This chemist may contribute to chemistry and help move that field forward, while attacking other forms of science they do not understand–maybe they don’t believe in general relativity, and spend their free time attacking it and spreading ignorance. Maybe they believe in idiotic philosophy.
This type of behavior is unfortunately common, and is one of the ways philosophy has retained its standing–through support by a small number of misguided scientists, and widespread support by a mystery-loving general population.