Some interesting philosophical assessments for the scientifically oriented were pointed out in Living Issues in Philosophy (1972 edition) that I though worthy of consideration and wondered what others might think…
1) Scientific research can only find that which our methods and instruments are capable of finding.
2) Every observation includes an observer and every experiment an experimenter who designs it. Thus one can never be totally free of a somewhat subjective element.
3) Each scientific conclusion includes the physical analysis (which is concrete and for the most part objective) and the resultant mathematical and logical speculation (which is abstract and often contains subjectivity)
4) No single method of classification describes or finds everything of the subject matter being classified and there can be different bases upon which different classification systems can be created.
5) Definitions (for example what is a species) vary over time to include the more general variances and nuances, as well as new facts discovered, of the one or many that are defining a thing or subject.
6) The whole may have qualities not found in the parts and the parts can have qualities nor reflected or not discerned when looking at the whole (the nature of the Atom is a great example here).
7) There can be many interpretations of a thing, person, or event. How, when, or from what angle we look at a thing or event/process can influence our conclusions (what is the nature of an electron is a perfect example).
8) Anything in process or development can only be completely understood when one grasps the past of the process or development and the future or where or why it going there (which can never actually be fully known until we arrive at that place).
9) Conclusions are only as precise as the concluding intellect can analyze, organize, and articulate them.
Do you agree or disagree with any, why or why not…and I realize this is looking at science philosophically so it is from that perspective (which demonstrates point 10 nicely for those who may disagree).
Paul
1) Scientific research can only find that which our methods and instruments are capable of finding.
2) Every observation includes an observer and every experiment an experimenter who designs it. Thus one can never be totally free of a somewhat subjective element.
3) Each scientific conclusion includes the physical analysis (which is concrete and for the most part objective) and the resultant mathematical and logical speculation (which is abstract and often contains subjectivity)
4) No single method of classification describes or finds everything of the subject matter being classified and there can be different bases upon which different classification systems can be created.
5) Definitions (for example what is a species) vary over time to include the more general variances and nuances, as well as new facts discovered, of the one or many that are defining a thing or subject.
6) The whole may have qualities not found in the parts and the parts can have qualities nor reflected or not discerned when looking at the whole (the nature of the Atom is a great example here).
7) There can be many interpretations of a thing, person, or event. How, when, or from what angle we look at a thing or event/process can influence our conclusions (what is the nature of an electron is a perfect example).
8) Anything in process or development can only be completely understood when one grasps the past of the process or development and the future or where or why it going there (which can never actually be fully known until we arrive at that place).
9) Conclusions are only as precise as the concluding intellect can analyze, organize, and articulate them.
Do you agree or disagree with any, why or why not…and I realize this is looking at science philosophically so it is from that perspective (which demonstrates point 10 nicely for those who may disagree).
Paul
