Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 02/15/05
- Next message: Bill Hobba: "Re: Diverging Opinions on Physics Foundations"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:15:48 -0600
robert j. kolker wrote:
>
>
> Lester Zick wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, Albert, empiricism doesn't yield truth. It only yields
>> falsity.
>
>
> That is true. There is no way of proving a scientific theory is true,
> always and forever, but one can falsify it. There is also something else
> that empiricism provides: technology.
As I pointed out before, a mixed bag, with arguably no net benefit.
> Pure non-empirical philsophy is
> useless and worse than useless. It is also a waste of our finite and
> precious time.
Kind of like the "Art and discipline" of non-empirical
mathematics, huh?
--
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the
range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally
impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."
-- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"
- Next message: Bill Hobba: "Re: Diverging Opinions on Physics Foundations"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
