An Open Letter to Stephen Hawking

Philosophy Is Always Relevant

Professor Stephen William Hawking CH, CBE, FRS, FRSA, ETC., ETC.

Being of somewhat scattered focus with regards to the popular media, I only just recently read your comments made at Google's Zeitgeist Conference, 2011, to the effect that "philosophy is dead." Also that philosophers "have not kept up with modern developments in science" and that scientists "have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge."

My initial reaction upon reading your words was, at the risk of waxing overly emotional, a dull kind of ache; a sense of betrayal even. That a man who I had, with my purely layman's grasp of the sciences which you so thoroughly command, admired for his intellect and, of course, felt great sympathy for given your physical difficulties could have so thoroughly shat upon everything I hold close seemed incomprehensible to me. As, in my eyes at least, a successor to Einstein, whose humanity is of far greater relevance to me than his accomplishments in the field of E=MC² could ever be, given my lack of schooling in such matters, your callous words struck a dissonant note which I quickly came to feel as being intolerably offensive, given my values and convictions.

I snatched up my laptop and proceeded to do the unthinkable. I . Of course, no one reads my page (including me), so while doing so technically qualified as publishing my response it didn't satisfy my deeper need to have these words matter. And so, upon further reflection and having since discovered Medium, here is my more measured second effort at replying to your words, Professor Hawking.

Me and What Army?

First, my disclaimer: These are not the words of an educated mind. In fact, I never graduated high school, much less attended university. This is a matter of public record and likely cause for some to question who the Hell I think I am to be calling Professor Hawking out; I'll even take it a step further and admit that, until very recently, I'd never even read much philosophy. Specifically, I'd avoided the Greeks with an almost superstitious mingling of fear and awe.

When I finally did crack that egg it was almost entirely by accident, but it resulted in my being exposed to one Heraclitus of Ephesus, who I recognized as sharing certain of my views before I subsequently learned that he was held to be in any way obscure. I'm in the process of organizing my thoughts on that topic for eventual publication, but I offer this preview as representing the full extent (or lack thereof) of the credentials I bring to the discussion at hand:

Wisdom is, in part, Understanding the limitations of Knowledge, which is useful where the sciences are concerned but dangerous when applied to any subject more complicated than triangles (or black holes), such as the human condition, where other tools are required.

That's Heraclitus (and Socrates) 101; the two share the same vocabulary on this subject, as I hope to demonstrate at a later date. I didn't decipher Heraclitus; my hyperlexic little mind surfed his words, mis-translated and otherwise. Without hitting the sort of speed-bumps most encounter, I admit, but I'd already reached the same notions myself, through years of doing things the hard way.

One (or more) Philosophers' Opinions, Then.

Professor Hawking, you claimed that philosophy is dead. I trust that this essay will effectively disprove that assertion, if in no other way than the most obvious and quite indisputable as-of-this-writing evidence that a living mind lurks behind these words. Fair enough?

On to the rest, then. That philosophers "have not kept up with modern developments in science" and that scientists "have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge."

Horse-shit and fuckwittery, I say. Recognizing that, by itself, those words might not prove entirely compelling to a less learned, if infinitely more educated, reader, I shall continue to verbiate on the subject.