Concerning Stephen Hawking’s Claim  That Philosophy Is Dead (2012) [pdf]
As a philosopher who also works in philosophy and frequently reviews for top journals, I have skimmed over this article and unfortunately have to say that these kind of loose essays who mingle together various unrelated issues in some grand tour de force without any stringent argumentation don&#x27;t do our discipline much of a favor.<p>In my personal experience, roughly 90% of philosophy publications are trash (give or take), but the remaining 10% are extremely interesting and worth reading both by philosophers and people outside the field. You have to pick carefully. Moreover, if you look at the history of philosophy that has always been the case, although the percentage of trash might have increased a little bit lately due to the nature of peer reviewing and the overall state of the discipline as a profession (too many people, not enough room for originality, too much focus on number of publications and self-promotion).<p>Hawking&#x27;s point was different, though, and he&#x27;s essentially right. The vast majority of all professional philosophers simply don&#x27;t have the mathematical skills and time to keep at pace with any developments in physics after special relativity and early quantum physics. But don&#x27;t blame the philosophers alone for it, this is the result of our educational system and the extreme rise of mathematical methods in sciences in general. Who can afford, in our modern society, to master the latest developments of String Theory and what&#x27;s going on in philosophy with its many areas and subareas, all of this at the same time?<p>On a side note, if you&#x27;re interested in formal philosophy, exact philosophy, philosophy as a science or however you might call it, I&#x27;d recommend studying mathematics instead and philosophy only as a secondary topic or not at all. It&#x27;s easy to get into a philosophy department as a mathematician, there are many examples, but the other way round? Not going to happen.