Why has modern physics not permeated throughout all of philosophy?

Question

Modern physics seems to agree that both time and space are not really fundamental - they are emergent properties. This is articulated well in the IEP article on time.

However, it seems that much of modern philosophical work still depends on the classical view of these things - as fundamental. As an example, I recently asked a question generally related to this. As the user Conifold says, "Accounts of resurrection typically assume classical view of time." Why are, even modern, ideas in fields like these still "stuck" on the idea of a fundamental time and space? While this is just one specific example, it seems that much of the philosophical literature presupposes the classical view of time (as well as the classical view of space), except of course work in the philosophy of time.

So, why have advancements in physics, which show that much of our intuitions about reality are often wrong, not had much of an effect on philosophy in general?

Answer 1

I'm not a professional in this field, but will offer my perspectives on this.

The parts of physics where our intuitions about reality as you put it furnish the wrong answers occur in circumstances so far removed from ordinary human experience that as far as the overall program of philosophy is concerned, they don't matter. This means that recent advances in those fields of physics furnish no opportunity to advance the philosophy program in any meaningful way.

For example, for speeds that are a significant fraction of the speed of light, the relationship between an object's mass and its momentum are significantly altered in a nonintuitive way (at least for a non-physicist) but since humans have no way to travel that fast in our everyday lives, we never experience those effects as part of our reality.

Similarly, for objects the size of an atomic nucleus, newtonian mechanics stops furnishing an accurate representation of the behavior of those objects and gives way to quantum mechanics, which is nonintuitive (even to physicists!). But since objects that small do not play any direct role in our everyday lives, to the extent that philosophy concerns itself with humans and how they interact with their environment and with other humans, quantum mechanics does not need to be taken into account by philosophy.

I am aware of the things that Bohr and Heisenberg wrote about this but I hold more to the views of Weinberg and Feynman. Others may choose as they wish.