Re: There is no gap between philosophy and physics - is belief evil?

From: Bilge (dubious_at_radioactivex.lebesque-al.net)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:21:47 -0000

 Kenneth Doyle:
>reany@asu.edu (Patrick Reany) wrote in
>news:844a1b64.0407221415.7dc1b444@posting.google.com:
>
>>> >The most a theory can do is model some of the observables of nature
>>> >and postulate hypothetical causes to account for them.
>>>
>>> In that case, the bible would have to considered a scientific
>>> theory.
>>
>> I don't see the logic in that claim.
>>
>
>He seems to have forgotten that the hypothetical cause must be vulnerable
>to falisfication by experiment.

  Since patrick already assumes that any human theory cannot be a
theory which ``really'' describes what nature ``really'' is, the
issue of falsifiability has already been settled. It's only a
matter of personal preference after that. You can't now argue
that science differs from religion, since the only difference is
the point at which one decides to leave the rest to god.

Quantcast