"I think philosophers can do things akin to theoretical scientists, in that, having read about empirical data, they too can think of what hypotheses and theories might account for that data. So there's a continuity between philosophy and science in that way"
About this Quote
Nozick is quietly trying to reclaim philosophy from the caricature of armchair wordplay by giving it a job description scientists will recognize: model-building. The phrasing is strategic. He doesn’t say philosophers discover facts; they “having read about empirical data” do something “akin” to theorists - a careful demotion that also functions as an upgrade. Philosophy, on this view, earns relevance by staying downstream from experiment while remaining upstream of explanation.
The subtext is a defense against two critics at once. Against positivists who treat philosophy as obsolete, Nozick argues it still participates in the same intellectual economy as science: you don’t need a lab to contribute if your contribution is conceptual architecture. Against philosophers tempted toward pure a priori system-building, he smuggles in a constraint: the data matter, and you ignore them at your peril. It’s a tacit jab at metaphysics that floats free of the world.
Contextually, this sits in late 20th-century analytic philosophy, when the boundary line with cognitive science, economics, and biology was getting porous, and when “naturalism” was becoming a professional shibboleth. Nozick isn’t fully naturalizing philosophy; he’s negotiating terms of peace. “Continuity” is the key word: not identity, not surrender, but a shared method of imaginative explanation under pressure from reality. Philosophy’s distinctive move becomes not measuring, but proposing the frameworks that make measurements intelligible - and contesting the frameworks when they harden into dogma.
The subtext is a defense against two critics at once. Against positivists who treat philosophy as obsolete, Nozick argues it still participates in the same intellectual economy as science: you don’t need a lab to contribute if your contribution is conceptual architecture. Against philosophers tempted toward pure a priori system-building, he smuggles in a constraint: the data matter, and you ignore them at your peril. It’s a tacit jab at metaphysics that floats free of the world.
Contextually, this sits in late 20th-century analytic philosophy, when the boundary line with cognitive science, economics, and biology was getting porous, and when “naturalism” was becoming a professional shibboleth. Nozick isn’t fully naturalizing philosophy; he’s negotiating terms of peace. “Continuity” is the key word: not identity, not surrender, but a shared method of imaginative explanation under pressure from reality. Philosophy’s distinctive move becomes not measuring, but proposing the frameworks that make measurements intelligible - and contesting the frameworks when they harden into dogma.
Quote Details
| Topic | Reason & Logic |
|---|
More Quotes by Robert
Add to List
