Seers and Craftspeople

Columnist Steve Bellovin discusses the need to judge new ideas more by their potential, and less by what they leave unsolved

String and M-theory: answering the critics

Using as a springboard a three-way debate between theoretical physicist Lee Smolin, philosopher of science Nancy Cartwright and myself, I address in layman's terms the issues of why we need a unified theory of the fundamental interactions and why, in my opinion, string and M-theory currently offer the best hope. The focus will be on responding more generally to the various criticisms. I also describe the diverse application of string/M-theory techniques to other branches of physics and mathematics which render the whole enterprise worthwhile whether or not "a theory of everything" is forthcoming.Comment: Update on EPSRC. (Contribution to the Special Issue of Foundations of Physics: "Forty Years Of String Theory: Reflecting On the Foundations", edited by Gerard 't Hooft, Erik Verlinde, Dennis Dieks and Sebastian de Haro. 22 pages latex

Science and Philosophy: A Love–Hate Relationship

Funder: Trinity College, University of Cambridge; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000727In this paper I review the problematic relationship between science and philosophy; in particular, I will address the question of whether science needs philosophy, and I will offer some positive perspectives that should be helpful in developing a synergetic relationship between the two. I will review three lines of reasoning often employed in arguing that philosophy is useless for science: a) philosophy's death diagnosis ('philosophy is dead'); b) the historic-agnostic argument/challenge "show me examples where philosophy has been useful for science, for I don't know of any"; c) the division of property argument (or: philosophy and science have different subject matters, therefore philosophy is useless for science). These arguments will be countered with three contentions to the effect that the natural sciences need philosophy. I will: a) point to the fallacy of anti-philosophicalism (or: 'in order to deny the need for philosophy, one must do philosophy') and examine the role of paradigms and presuppositions (or: why science can't live without philosophy); b) point out why the historical argument fails (in an example from quantum mechanics, alive and kicking); c) briefly sketch some domains of intersection of science and philosophy and how the two can have mutual synergy. I will conclude with some implications of this synergetic relationship between science and philosophy for the liberal arts and sciences

Learning By Not Doing: An Experimental Investigation of Observational Learning

In this paper we present experimental evidence suggesting that observational learning (i.e. learning-by-not-doing but by observing) may outperform learning-by-doing.LEARNING

Philosophy and Physics : A Reconciliation

Historically, philosophy and physics have been highly integrated disciplines. After the Quantum Revolution, physics distanced itself from the philosophical method, leading to a dramatic change in methodology and philosophy of science. As scientific style has shifted and philosophy fallen out of favour, the distancing of philosophy and physics has made its way into the public arena, with highly regarded physicists denigrating philosophy and philosophers arguing for the value of their discipline. This thesis discusses different conceptions in philosophy of science, the role of scientism in the public discussion of the integration of philosophy and physics, and how string theory provides a unique and fitting example of how science can be affected by unrecognized changes in underlying philosophies. I determine that as evidenced by my discussion of string theory, philosophical intervention is necessary for solving fundamental problems in physics and that collaboration between the two disciplines must continue to increase

Unpicking the narrative: difficult women, difficult work

Freddie Robins discusses her practice with curators Day+Gluckman in the context of textiles, feminism, heritage and art practice. Using examples of her work and exhibition profile they will consider how her career and practice has developed as an artist working with textiles and whether she consciously considers it to have a feminist voice; whether gender still has a pivotal role in how textiles are read and how Freddie’s work continues to contribute to that debate. Linking to recent Day+Gluckman exhibitions that have included Freddie: Concerning Matter in 2009: Fifties, Fashion and Emerging Feminism in 2011 and more recently, Liberties: reflecting on 40 years since the Sex Discrimination Act the conversation will look at how textiles have been curated into exhibitions, for example FABRIC (2014) and Entangled (2017); examining curatorial hierarchies and whether there is a perceived or actual fear in displaying objects that don’t hold their shape. We will also discuss the propensity of echo chambers in the art world and beyond - are we only talking to each other?! How as artists and curators do we identify our audiences and is there a gendered snobbery about the ‘right type’ of audience