Philosophers & Scientists
The way I see it, scientists and philosophers equally have to postulate unique ideas which are not completely restricted by their traditions. But, in a way, I see philosophers’ dabbling in otherness and otherworldliness as that which goes beyond science for science is restricted by only that it can materially validate in terms of demonstration. You may get the feeling that I am expressing an argument that favors theology, but philosophy has no set postulate that it attempts to wrap its mind around. Whereas theologians and the religious have their God, philosophers have only what they call wisdom. And even then, philosophical schools within destroy fundamental views of wisdom and even those most crucial to our common sense and daily living. Yet, it is the philosopher in all of us, including scientists, that enables for growth–at a certain point, we tell our philosophical leanings: Enough! However, the field of the philosophy makes its duty of wavering in the discontent of the unknown, attempting to systematize or destroy it, and everywhere in between. Now if you wish to argue for this or that restriction on philosophy that is outside of scientific discourse, we can debate that, but insofar as philosophy’s relation to science, philosophy must be the supervening force. I consider this the case simply by virtue of the existence of the scientific method. It has become a necessitated separation that amounts to a sort of parallelism for how we approach life.
And I believe the intersection where science and philosophy meet, and have always met, is with metaphysics. Sure, people are jaded toward when philosopher’s talk of metaphysics, but that’s just because science itself is hard enough for people to grasp, let alone the abstraction of grueling applied mathematics.