It has gotten better with many prominent physicists rejecting the shut up and calculate approach and to go back to "natural philosophy" and "understanding". Brian Green and Tim Maudlin come to mind from the internet sphere as well as the guy that debated WL Craig.

It doesn't help that in previous eras people like Feynman dismissed philosophy due to bad interactions with their peers despite certain things they came up with mirrored 19th century philosophy. I was leafing Schopenhauer's Aphorisms on the Wisdom of Life and one chapter was almost identical to some Feynman writings about ideas generatings and genius.

>>17089481
Einstein ignored Kants teachings about space.

>>17089511
What frenchy is this coming from?

>>17090396
I see why, it's nonsense.

Immanuel Kant argued that space is not an external, objective reality or a physical property of things-in-themselves, but rather a subjective, a priori "form of intuition" that the human mind imposes on raw sensory data.

>>17089481
>and metaphysics transcend natural science
source?, sounds like some religious shit

>>17089481
The only German philosophers worth reading are Nietzche and Sterner. Everyone else, especially Kant, Hegel, Marx, Fichte and Schelling, are literal pseuds and their works should be used as toilet paper.

>>17090410
Subjektive is the wrong translation, that's not what he meant. He was right tho that space is just the extension, and it's retarded to give it numbers and "bend it".

>>17090476
Is your religion of mathematical numbers incompatible with thoughts like this?

>>17089481
Any good physicist is not wasting time on that shit. They're chasing tail amongst their young students

>>17090488
Einstein, Pauli and Schrödinger were huge Schopenhauer fans, Einstein even had his portrait in his study.

>>17090498
Right if it's an extension then it's a warped extra dimension