Neil deGrasse Tyson Answers 10 Questions

If you’re not aware of Neil deGrasse Tyson, your life has a gaping hole in it…

Tyson is the director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History and host of NOVA scienceNOW. Here he answers reader questions and talks about the universe and how he’d save the world.



About Rodibidably

Jeff Randall is a frequent volunteer for free-thought organizations, including the Center For Inquiry – DC. Having been blogging since January 2008, he decided that a community of bloggers would be an interesting new experience (or at the very least a fun way to annoy his friends into reading his posts more frequently). Since finding out about about the existence of, and then joining, the atheist/skeptic community in 2007 he has been committed to community activism, critical thinking in all aspects of life, science, reason, and a fostering a secular society.
This entry was posted in Science. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Neil deGrasse Tyson Answers 10 Questions

  1. Sarah H says:

    That was great except for the shitty put down of philosophers. Scientists are not better than philosophers. Moreover, Mr. Tyson, we don’t “run with questions” such as “what temp does the number 7 melt at?” or “What is the square root of a pork chop?” That is completely absurd and offensive. We ask just as meaningful questions as you do. Otherwise nice job… Man, that part pissed me off though! There are some pretty bad philosophers out there but I doubt even them would ever “run with such question”

    • Jeff Randall says:

      He is obviously stereotyping philosophers to some degree, but I don’t think it’s quite as unfair a stereotype as you make it out.

      Science is about facts. About what can be observed. What can be repeated. What can be tested…
      Philosophy, at least in part, is about those things which are more subjective, more abstract…

      Yes there are many good realms of philosophy as well, and his stereotype ignores those; but I don’t see that as intentionally “dissing” all philosophy, but I see it as Tyson trying to show the primary difference between philosophy and science.

    • Secundinius says:

      First, I apologize for responding to such a dated post, but I’d like to add my own understanding to this. I certainly agree, there are many poor quality philosophers out there, and, to me at least, it seems that most merely stand on the shoulders of philosophers of yore. But I digress.

      While I have been tirelessly working to find the square root of a pork chop since I first watched this video, I don’t believe his intention was to assert that philosophers would genuinely ask questions like that. I believe the statement was more Dr. Tyson explaining that scientists don’t bother with questions that are blatantly incongruous.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s