Scientific Philosophy: the Joke That One Does Not Tell at the Dinner Table

I am introduced to a “genius” philosopher whose work perfectly integrates philosophy and science. “A positivist?” Negative. And, according to the genius, currents like existentialism are pseudo-philosophy. My smile is automatic. I am, in fact, on great days: thanks to Pessoa, I have devoted several hundred pages to astrology. I believe, however, that the genius philosopher will not take me the time to read a summary. It is glaringly obvious to me: philosophy is only harmonized with science when it ceases to deal with man’s great problems—precisely those that go beyond the scope of science. To integrate philosophy and science is, in a practical way, to mutilate philosophy and ignore the real applicability of science. But I admit: no surprise there. Although “scientific philosophy” is a crude joke, one of those that one does not tell at the dinner table, it is natural that human presumption wants to paste, in all available nouns, the supreme qualitative: this guarantees victory over the past—the very old past…