the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

posted 16 Aug 2004, 15:08 by Grantaire, Moderator

Yes it does, quite well thank you. I didn't know that you had ceased being a professor though. At least we'll get TTT that much sooner :wink: What do you see as being the methodological weaknesses of science however? Science is the only institution that is truly self-correcting. If a hypothesis is found to not match the facts, it is thrown out- where is the weakness in that? Well, I suppose that it could be argued that science as an institution cannot explain the intrinsic value of anything (thus scientific nihilism), yet I do not see there as being a weakness in the actual methodology. Also, you say that philosophy tries to explain that which goes beyond science- but do you mean that in the sense that it explains things that we simply don't have a scientific explanation for, or things that are truly beyond the realms of science ever? I agree with you in the use of interpretative pluralism, but if you find philosophy to be less shall we say...definitive than science, what made you get into philosophy as opposed to science? Philosophy has an obvious place in your life, but what made it be that way as opposed to you being say, a scientist? I ask this because as I am a high school student, that branching off is coming- and I am heavily interested in both. An intriguing conundrum :wink: view post

  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown.