Thales Day 2016 (English Subtitles)

Is philosophy dead?

Anja C. Andersen, Astrophysicist, Professor, Niels Bohr Institute & Vincent F. Hendricks, Professor of Philosophy, Copenhagen University

Father of String Theory Holger Bech Nielsen on philosophy and quantum mechanics

Father of String Theory Holger Bech Nielsen on Thales

Words of Wisdom

In his dialogue Protagoras, Plato says that the wisdom of Thales and the other Seven Sages was reflected in the brief but memorable remarks they each uttered when they met. In this spirit we put together a list of thought-provoking and insigthful quotes from our panel debates at Thales Day (alphabetically organized):

“I find it quite fascinating how the human brain might be a bit limited, because it is hard for us to think of something that is completely meaningless. In this way we are part of nature and the universe; we cannot help but think of something that fits with it.”

  • Anja C. Andersen (Astronomer)

“One of the articles I am most proud of was completely wrong but it was a great idea, and it was very well written and still quoted. It just turned out to be wrong.”

  • Anja C. Andersen (Astronomer)

“I think it is a strength when philosophers want to help natural science get to grips with reality, because reality is complex and sometimes it is also more complex than physicists care for.”

  • Anja C. Andersen (Astronomer)

“I think perhaps the biggest danger in science today… is that we all become more and more specialized and then we all know a lot about something very specific, but it is not really useful to society, you might say, because you are so far down the knowledge silo that you don't talk to those in the other silos, so I can sometimes be worried about the lack of cross-info.” Anja C. Andersen (Astronomer)

“What perhaps surprises even philosophers sometimes, is; 'What happened to reality in our considerations?' If we look at the philosophers I consider great, such as Aristotle, Bertrand Russel, Leibniz and Norman Wiehler, what characterized them is that they were what you with a broad term can call natural philosophers. For them nature was always relatively close, and they were not as speculative.”

  • Vincent F. Hendricks (Professor of Philosophy)

"The reason why we got the idea that they must be similar, was philosophy, because epistemology try to find the correct structures of knowledge. So philosophy, in this way, helped us by giving us a structured way of looking at this problem. But it was necessary to use mathematics as a tool to justify what made good sense: would it not be strange if completely different mechanisms were at play with regards to bystander effects and lemming effects? It is, after all, based on the same fundamental principle. So here philosophy expanded our knowledge. But mostly because the structure we are looking for can be helped by philosophy, and can be verified or refuted- and then we are back with you, because then we do need to go out and attach a hook to reality."

  • Vincent F. Hendricks (Professor of Philosophy)

“I don´t want to put philosophy in the grave and I am happy it still exists, however, I would like to have it embalmed in such a way that what is around it is the other sciences- so it is embalmed in them. And then we can raise the question again next year, and the year after that and that is how it goes with philosophy and science together.”

  • Vincent F. Hendricks (Professor of Philosophy)

“Anja and I share a basic premise: The truth is always interesting for us, always alluring, also when it is burdensome. This is what characterizes being human, we are questioning individuals, it drives us forward. And in this way it is almost similar, to decide on whether to buy a new freezer or to ask what black holes look like. It is still questions that entice our curiosity…”

  • Vincent F. Hendricks (Professor of Philosophy)