Quote Origin: The Philosophy of Science Is As Useful To Scientists As Ornithology Is To Birds

Posted byquoteresearch

Richard Feynman? Steven Weinberg? Barnett Newman? John D. Barrow? Philip Kitcher? Apocryphal? Anonymous?

Humorous illustration of a bird reading a book (Public domain)

Question for Quote Investigator: The philosophy of science critically examines the foundations and methods of empiricism. Practitioners of science are sometimes indifferent or hostile to this analysis. Apparently, a scientist once presented the following derisive analogy:

The philosophy of science is as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.

In other words, a textbook on ornithology would be indecipherable to a bird just as a treatise on the philosophy of science would be irrelevant to a working scientist. This thought has been ascribed to U.S. theoretical physicist Richard Feynman, but I am skeptical because I have never seen a solid citation. Would you please explore this topic?

Reply from Quote Investigator: QI has found no substantive support for the attribution to Richard Feynman. The quotation is not listed in the valuable 2015 compendium “The Quotable Feynman” from Princeton University Press.1

The earliest close match known to QI appeared in the journal “Nature” in 1987 which printed a speech delivered by theoretical physicist Steven Weinberg. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:2

I’ve heard the remark (although I forget the source) that the philosophy of science is just about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.

Steven Weinberg did not claim credit; instead, he presented an anonymous attribution. Interestingly, the remark is a member of a family of related sayings that began with an analogy credited to prominent U.S. painter Barnett Newman in the journal “Art in America” in 1955:3

. . . aesthetics is for the artist like Ornithology is for the birds . . .

A separate Quote Investigator article about the saying immediately above is available here.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Richard Feynman did criticize philosophers of science. For instance, during a physics lecture delivered to undergraduates at California Institute of Technology in the early 1960s, Feynman said the following:4

Philosophers, incidentally, say a great deal about what is absolutely necessary for science, and it is always, so far as one can see, rather naive, and probably wrong. For example, some philosopher or other said it is fundamental to the scientific effort that if an experiment is performed in, say, Stockholm, and then the same experiment is done in, say, Quito, the same results must occur. That is quite false.

It is not necessary that science do that; it may be a fact of experience, but it is not necessary. For example, if one of the experiments is to look out at the sky and see the aurora borealis in Stockholm, you do not see it in Quito; that is a different phenomenon.

Barnett Newman’s saying was memorable, and it has circulated for decades. A 1986 article in the periodical “New Scientist” contained a variant which demonstrated distribution within the science milieu. The painter’s name was misspelled as “Barnet”:5

. . . Barnet Newman’s adage that art criticism is as much use to artists as ornithology is to birds . . .

Also, in 1986 writer David Novarr employed a variant in the domain of biography:6

I am even in some degree sympathetic to the formulation that theory and criticism are about as important to writers of biography as the study of ornithology is to birds.

In 1987 Steven Weinberg employed a variant about the philosophy of science while disclaiming credit as mentioned at the beginning of this article:7

I’ve heard the remark (although I forget the source) that the philosophy of science is just about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.

In 1988 astronomer John D. Barrow published “The World Within the World”, and he included the saying without attribution:8

Philosophers of science have argued long and hard over the meaning of the concept of a ‘law of Nature’. These arguments have had no discernable influence upon the practice of science; most scientists being sympathetic to the prejudice that ‘the philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds’ (notwithstanding the observation that some species of bird owe their continued existence to the interest of ornithologists).

In 1998 Professor of Philosophy Philip Kitcher published an essay titled “A Plea for Science Studies”, and he tentatively attributed the saying to Richard Feynman. This was the earliest printed linkage to Feynman known to QI:9

Some of us have spent large portions of our academic careers arguing for the importance of the critical study of science. Yet practicing scientists have not always responded favorably to those arguments. Richard Feynman’s famous (perhaps apocryphal) judgment that philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds has been quoted and echoed by Steven Weinberg, who entitles an entire chapter of Dreams of a Final Theory “Against Philosophy.”

In 2002 “Science Askew: A Light-Hearted Look at the Scientific World” by Donald M Simanek and John Holden included the saying:10

Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.
Attributed to Richard Feynman (1918–1988)
U.S. Physicist; Nobel Prize 1965

The accompanying footnote in “Science Askew” described the existence of a family of sayings and indicated that the authors were unable to trace the origin:

Feynman probably adapted it from similar sentiments comparing scholarly studies of a discipline to the actual practice of folks in that discipline. For example, we find “Musicology is to musicians as ornithology is to birds” and “Art criticism is to artists as ornithology is to birds.” We were not able to trace this to its source.

In conclusion, the creator of this saying about the philosophy of science remains unknown. Physicist Steven Weinberg helped to popularize the remark via a 1987 speech, but the attribution he provided was anonymous. The statement belongs to a family of related sayings that was initiated by painter Barnett Newman in the 1950s.

Image Notes: Humorous illustration of a bird reading a book. This illustration is in the public domain.

Acknowledgement: Great thanks to Peppe Liberti whose email message led QI to formulate this question and perform this exploration. Liberti published an article about this family of sayings in “Il Tascabile”, the “Italian Encyclopedia of Science, Letters, and Arts”. Liberti noted that the quotation employed by Steven Weinberg in 1987 had been implausibly attributed to physicist Richard Feynman. Liberti identified several important citations. Also, he traced the family of sayings back to Barnett Newman and the Woodstock Art Conference in 1952.

Update History: On April 16, 2024 the format of the bibliographical notes was updated. Also, the full article was placed on this website.

  1. 2015, The Quotable Feynman, Edited by Michelle Feynman, Quotation is absent; the word “ornithology” is absent, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  2. 1987 December 3, Nature, Newtonianism, reductionism and the art of congressional testimony by Steven Weinberg, Start Page 433, Macmillan, London. (Accessed Nature archive on March 27, 2023 via nature.com) ↩︎
  3. 1955 December, Art in America, Volume 43, Number 4, Gallery Notes by Dorothy Gees Seckler, Start Page 50, Quote Page 59, Column 1, Cannondale, Connecticut. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  4. 2011, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume 1: Mainly Mechanics, Radiation, and Heat, New Millennium Edition, Authors: Richard Feynman, Robert Leighton, and Matthew Sands, (Based on undergraduate physics lectures delivered by Richard Feynman at California Institute of Technology between 1961 and 1963), Chapter 2: Basic Physics, Quote Page 2–7, Basic Books, New York. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  5. 1986 March 6, New Scientist, Peer review — in the best interests of science? by Bernard Dixon, Quote Page 58, IPC magazines, London. (Google Books Full View) ↩︎
  6. 1986, The Lines of Life: Theories of Biography 1880–1970 by David Novarr, Section: Preface, Quote Page xv, Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indiana. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  7. 1987 December 3, Nature, Newtonianism, reductionism and the art of congressional testimony by Steven Weinberg, Start Page 433, Macmillan, London. (Accessed Nature archive on March 27, 2023 via nature.com) ↩︎
  8. 1990 (1988 Copyright), The World Within the World by John D. Barrow (Professor, Astronomy Centre, University of Sussex), Chapter 1: Prologue, Quote Page 10, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  9. 1998, A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmodernist Myths About Science, Edited by Noretta Koertge, Chapter 3: A Plea for Science Studies by Philip Kitcher (Professor of Philosophy at the University of California at San Diego), Start Page 32, Quote Page 32, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
  10. 2002, Science Askew: A Light-Hearted Look at the Scientific World by Donald M Simanek and John Holden, Chapter 22: Philosophy of Science, Quote Page 215, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol, England. (Verified with scans) ↩︎
Exit mobile version