[-empyre-] Re: empyre Digest, Vol 35, Issue 4
- To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
- Subject: [-empyre-] Re: empyre Digest, Vol 35, Issue 4
- From: h w <misterwarwick@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 19:49:48 -0700 (PDT)
- Delivered-to: empyre@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=DTJDvw/lONZKwpLjoQjv7VW1fyWgNZeYlb3+PObdwYEyaDZLecmqArBexX3iA9TSJiD5ZtBph7q5ppllXcNBhIed3Hxf1+ASgsh2K+kFxruQcHmJa6CVzpBG2Ld2ESOFsZtQcr2Fd3dcfmKD+JnzKT0LoSIWe67n9/BAhd1S8yw=;
- In-reply-to: <20071005020008.1118C4DA0CF0@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
- Reply-to: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
John hopkins wrote:
isn't science the process of constructing self-reflexive
re-presentations that are accurate within the knowledge-space
where-in science holds sway?
=====================================================
That smells like Fish.
Simply: no. It is a method of ascertaining provisional understandings
of the universe or parts and or aspects thereof. It functions through a
process of testability and a repeatability of the test. Also, a certain
restriction on information is crucial (Ockham's Razor). It's nice to
have a falsifiability as well (per Popper). Sometimes that is not
possible, especially in terms of universal tests (define: universe.
Give three examples).
It isn't a "thing" - it's a way of working and understanding "things".
HW
TO
ON
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.