Hilary Putnam on the Philosophy of Science (1977) 

the interviewer is amazing, the guy comes up with amazing questions in a blink of an eye

Wonderful! A discussion between two brilliant men. R.I.P. Hilary.

I love Magee he truly is a great interviewer

love how happy he is to discuss these matters

I got to meet Dr. Putnam at Muhlenberg College many years ago. It was a treat. That was in his The Many Faces of Realism days. Brilliant man!

Bryan Magee = my hero.

I love this guy. He makes sense. Great thinker!

thanks for upload, respect!

Might be my favorite interview of the series.

Putnam is a freaking genius hes always looking at the present knowing this is the future

Haha I love this show. Hasn't started yet but I know I will love this episode!!!!

Good discussion. As for Putnam saying there is no mind independent truth and the Kant was right, read Quentin Meillassoux's "After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency" where he gives a counter example of something that is NOT dependent on the mind and hence "really" objective.

The article Minds and Machines, published in 1960, is the begin of cognitive science.

The presenter is awesome!

alguien tendrá esta entrevista en español que por favor me comparta el Ling.

Philosophy of mind, language and logic , thank you on induction and deduction.

I like Putnams warm smile :D

someone will have this interview in Spanish that please share with me the Ling.

One of the wonders for me is the Mathematicians ability to do calculations rapidly and accurately without using a computer or anything else.

Imagine saying something and Hilary Putnam responses "That is *exactly* true"

Amazing.

Hi. Thanks for the subs :)

good work

A very pleasant discussion. "FACT" or "VALUE JUDGEMENT" would seem to imply a sort of Social Contract, that observers agree on a description of an event. This in turn implies agreement between observers as to the language used. Evidently, the question also turns on the religious point of view. In this case we see how a religious description of an event differs from a scientific description of an event.

Strong interviewer.

What is number anyway?

Let's go in distant future. Let's assume that Science has discovered all the fundamental particles/concepts that explain this universe completely. I think.. 1. These fundamental particles/concepts will have to be taken as a 'given' (with no further explanation possible). 2. This is the ultimate future of science...to reach at something, which has to be taken as a 'given'.

Oh my goodness. To paraphrase Twain, “the rumors of science’s untimely demise have been greatly exaggerated.”

I knew her well

The laws of Classical Physics aren't wrong, but they only apply to the macro- and microscopic world. They can't be applied to the atomic and subatomic world. For the latter, Quantum Physics was needed. But both worlds are connected, and so are their theories.

A way to weed out women from Philosophy to keep philosophy a man's disciple etc is the deliberate focus on math and engineering as a prerequisite. Since the time of Plato essentially.

Could there be perception without interpretation?

29:05

Who had the better hair: Bertrand Russell or young Wittgenstein?

10:15 - Alternative Facts!

18:20

W host W guest

RIP Bryan Magee

Leaving aside the number of Hilbert's problems (23, not 50), Putnam ascribes to a Kantian theory of truth what actually belongs to a Kantian theory of phenomena: they are partially mind-made, I do not think there is a Kantian theory of truth, though there are Kant-influenced theories of truth, like Putnam's.

Wow, intellectually stimulating. I had no idea that Putnam was Kantian.

What when a woman knew geometry and weren't allowed in Plato's havens

This is the kind of thinking the world is in desperate need of today

There's a principle in biology, that evolving integrated complexity will have to lose attributes that no longer have survival value, so adaptations to change must be selected for at an earlier stage of development of the brain-body, so that although the biological toolkit may lose specific components of great usefulness, the eventual repertoire of adaptations becomes more generalized, or so the explanation goes for Neoteny, the retention of childhood characteristics in adults. In and of itself, this is a reason to always redevelop every generation's development from first principles, setting aside working hypotheses and reviewing the fitness of the basic underpinnings. That's not a Philosophy, that's the application of the scientific method as it corresponds to observations. So if and when a point is reached in formal education that the student's capabilities are matched to the human environment, then it's appropriate to award the Dr of Philosophy title before society's problems are re-evaluated and appropriate changes are attempted in the formal manner. None of this need apply to those in the general population who has natural aptitudes. So, teaching Philosophy? Philosophy has a spectrum from "idle" love of sophistry/words, to extracting the defining principles of existence from a holistic analysis of all knowledge, and then, "think for themselves", in order to act upon the refinements. If there's a field of philosophy that correlates human biology, then it's the medical requirements of mind and body that correspond to mental/philosophical health. Immunity and treatment of stressors, parasites and predators within the social culture. Once the treatment is recommended according to the best analysis, then it's an application for the best science, and recently, the best tools of science are to do with AI. It's applied philosophy made real.

I'm 12 and what is this!

ISFJ with developed Fe

Sounds like a Harry Potter book

thumbs up if you've had special relativity in high school

Science and mathematics of the Standard Model shows how fine tuning the parameter space gave rise to the new branch of physics of 'self-organizing systems', that explains everything from economics to psychology to the evolution of life and consciousness, intelligence, meme etc., yet we do not know how to define space, time, mass etc., and have no clue how FT occurred, or why mathematical laws, rules, algorithm are timeless and a priory and why physical reality has mathematical structure. Yet we discover how we won a series of lotteries in a row, each with one in a million/billion chance to win so that life evolve with perfection and with probability one, implying divine purpose, intelligent design by the universal consciousness.

O La weaa fome

Pulary Hitman

Prof Putnam seems to need to burp.

how can his name be hilary`?

he says "there is no algorithm to get scientific knowledge" then how is that our minds can get scientific knowledge

Magee makes a straw man of scientific method here. It’s a very weak discussion, as much as I admire them both.