The only true part of the title is glossed over as "a brief word on the opposite issue". Physics doesn't need philosophy in the way philosophers think. Physics students are mostly uninterested, and better off for that; some physicists do philosophy, and they do it better, especially if they avoid interacting with academic-philosophy-style philosophers.
Nonsense. Physics is founded on philosophy (as in, the scientific field of physics), and whether physicists deliberately engage with the philosophy or not they are using its framework. Being deliberate about it isn't necessary, but is useful for positioning the things one does in a wider framework.
I think the inverse connection is weaker; I don't think philosophy universally needs physics. That said, large chunks of philosophy greatly benefit from considering things established by the field of physics, so it's not like it's irrelevant either. But one can do, say, pure mathematics as a philosophical exercise without considering physics (again, as a field of reasearch).
All philosophy is anthropology;
All anthropology is psychology;
All psychology is biology;
All biology is chemistry;
All chemistry is physics;
All physics is math;
All math is philosophy. 😄
-17
u/bildramer 19d ago
The only true part of the title is glossed over as "a brief word on the opposite issue". Physics doesn't need philosophy in the way philosophers think. Physics students are mostly uninterested, and better off for that; some physicists do philosophy, and they do it better, especially if they avoid interacting with academic-philosophy-style philosophers.