Noam Chomsky is the father of modern linguistics, and his theories hold that the principles underlying the structure of language are biologically determined in the human mind and hence genetically transmitted. The 1984 Nobel Prize laureate in Medicine and Physiology, Niels Kaj Jerne, used Chomsky's generative grammar model to explain the human immune system, equating "components of a generative grammar ... with various features of protein structures." Chomsky's work contributed substantially to the decline of behaviorist psychology. In addition, some arguments in evolutionary psychology are derived from his research results
I've read less of Daniel Dennet, but he has been influential in the theory of mind and the direction that some AI research has taken.
When I think of modern philosophers, these are the giants.
> Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways.
It's funny that you mention that. While at undergrad I took a biology class taught by Robert Sapolsky (I consider him equal parts scientist and philosopher) where he philosophized on the origin of religiosity using scientific findings and research. Would you like ot know more: http://www.openculture.com/2014/12/robert-sapolsky-explains-...
They're not completely distinct fields of study, they operate on a spectrum as science and philsophy go hand in hand. The big questions in philosophy are somewhat neatly summed up in 4 questions: Who am I? What do I want? Why am I here? Where am I going? Substitute we for I, and then that pretty much sums up the questions science tries to answer.
I've read less of Daniel Dennet, but he has been influential in the theory of mind and the direction that some AI research has taken.
When I think of modern philosophers, these are the giants.
> Philosophy these days seems more about finding clever places to hide religious beliefs than it is about explaining the world as it is and answering questions in useful and productive ways.
It's funny that you mention that. While at undergrad I took a biology class taught by Robert Sapolsky (I consider him equal parts scientist and philosopher) where he philosophized on the origin of religiosity using scientific findings and research. Would you like ot know more: http://www.openculture.com/2014/12/robert-sapolsky-explains-...
They're not completely distinct fields of study, they operate on a spectrum as science and philsophy go hand in hand. The big questions in philosophy are somewhat neatly summed up in 4 questions: Who am I? What do I want? Why am I here? Where am I going? Substitute we for I, and then that pretty much sums up the questions science tries to answer.