Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
ID is officially dead.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PhantomGaze" data-source="post: 76148553" data-attributes="member: 313902"><p>Obviously the real world doesn't change ontologically. What changes is the definition of science, and what science "is", what is allowed to be discussed, and what thoughts are considered "scientific". </p><p></p><p>The misunderstanding is common (and actually important), but after reading <u><a href="https://www.lri.fr/~mbl/Stanford/CS477/papers/Kuhn-SSR-2ndEd.pdf" target="_blank">The Structure of Scientific Revolutions</a></u> by Kuhn, and being somewhat familiar with Popperian understandings already, I think it's fair to say that the history science tends to teach is often very... selective, in order to create a narrative of progress. That isn't to say that it doesn't make progress, rather to say that the reigning narrative determines the particular problems science 'progresses' by solving. </p><p></p><p><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=73m8mTdpsKgC&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=The+attribution+of+other+qualities+to+the+elementary+atoms+was+a+resort+to+the+occult+and+therefore+out+of+bounds+for+science.+Moli%C3%A8re+caught+the+new+spirit&source=bl&ots=ZQfjujvBxi&sig=ACfU3U1trn4pdGg8h0xZL1cUtnHQANhDHw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwilytDW8ZzyAhXNW80KHa7uA3oQ6AF6BAgCEAM#v=onepage&q=The%20attribution%20of%20other%20qualities%20to%20the%20elementary%20atoms%20was%20a%20resort%20to%20the%20occult%20and%20therefore%20out%20of%20bounds%20for%20science.%20Moli%C3%A8re%20caught%20the%20new%20spirit&f=false" target="_blank">For example</a> while we normally think of science as replacing 'occult' or outdated superstitious beliefs: </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>and a little ways down:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In reality, the mechano-corpuscular view of the world in Newton's time was far and away more materialistic than our current understanding of the natural world, but that is part of the narrative we've created to interpret scientific progress.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PhantomGaze, post: 76148553, member: 313902"] Obviously the real world doesn't change ontologically. What changes is the definition of science, and what science "is", what is allowed to be discussed, and what thoughts are considered "scientific". The misunderstanding is common (and actually important), but after reading [U][URL='https://www.lri.fr/~mbl/Stanford/CS477/papers/Kuhn-SSR-2ndEd.pdf']The Structure of Scientific Revolutions[/URL][/U] by Kuhn, and being somewhat familiar with Popperian understandings already, I think it's fair to say that the history science tends to teach is often very... selective, in order to create a narrative of progress. That isn't to say that it doesn't make progress, rather to say that the reigning narrative determines the particular problems science 'progresses' by solving. [URL='https://books.google.com/books?id=73m8mTdpsKgC&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=The+attribution+of+other+qualities+to+the+elementary+atoms+was+a+resort+to+the+occult+and+therefore+out+of+bounds+for+science.+Moli%C3%A8re+caught+the+new+spirit&source=bl&ots=ZQfjujvBxi&sig=ACfU3U1trn4pdGg8h0xZL1cUtnHQANhDHw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwilytDW8ZzyAhXNW80KHa7uA3oQ6AF6BAgCEAM#v=onepage&q=The%20attribution%20of%20other%20qualities%20to%20the%20elementary%20atoms%20was%20a%20resort%20to%20the%20occult%20and%20therefore%20out%20of%20bounds%20for%20science.%20Moli%C3%A8re%20caught%20the%20new%20spirit&f=false']For example[/URL] while we normally think of science as replacing 'occult' or outdated superstitious beliefs: and a little ways down: In reality, the mechano-corpuscular view of the world in Newton's time was far and away more materialistic than our current understanding of the natural world, but that is part of the narrative we've created to interpret scientific progress. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
ID is officially dead.
Top
Bottom