by mk

In sum, philosophy is not science. For it employs the rational tools of logical analysis and conceptual clarification in lieu of empirical measurement. And this approach, when carefully carried out, can yield knowledge at times more reliable and enduring than science, strictly speaking. For scientific measurement is in principle always subject to at least some degree of readjustment based on future observation. Yet sound philosophical argument achieves a measure of immortality.

I'm still digesting this. In large part, I agree. However, I am not sure 'reliable' is the word I would use. Some empirical scientific findings (such as the laws of thermodynamics) are as reliable and enduring as any other knowledge you might find. But there is a qualitative difference between philosophical and scientific knowledge, and it doesn't diminish philosophical knowledge. If anything, the difference makes philosophy that much more important.

Such a nice article.