I've seen some posts stating that science is a man-made construct. I'n not sure that I correctly understand what is meant by this, whether it is valid or just the splitting of frog hairs. Comments, please. 
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Science: Man-made construct?
- Thread starter Plumbdumb
- Start date
Late_Cretaceous
<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Sounds like Post Modernism - the philosopy that even philosophers would not touch (it found some appeal in english and anthropology departments in the last decade). Accordingly, EVERYTHING in life - including stuff like the moon, are "cultural constructs". Science and all of it's discoveries are simply inventirons of the minds that pondered them. Post modernism still exists today, even after the Skokal Affair (try a google search).
To see just how idiotic postmodernism is check out the "post modern generator" which can randomly compose papers worth of publishing in post modernist journals such as Social Text: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/
To see just how idiotic postmodernism is check out the "post modern generator" which can randomly compose papers worth of publishing in post modernist journals such as Social Text: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/
Upvote
0
Plumbdumb:
I'm not sure how you're using the term 'science.' The scientific method, certainly, is a man-made construct. Reality is not. The word 'science,' used differently, merely means the descriptive qualities of reality.
Please clarify.
To clarify. Religon: A Man-Made Construct? Does that rephrase make it clear why the question cannot be adequately answered?
I'm not sure how you're using the term 'science.' The scientific method, certainly, is a man-made construct. Reality is not. The word 'science,' used differently, merely means the descriptive qualities of reality.
Please clarify.
To clarify. Religon: A Man-Made Construct? Does that rephrase make it clear why the question cannot be adequately answered?
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Today at 02:47 PM Plumbdumb said this in Post #1
I've seen some posts stating that science is a man-made construct. I'n not sure that I correctly understand what is meant by this, whether it is valid or just the splitting of frog hairs. Comments, please.
Biblical literalists try to contrast "God's Word" with "man-made science". By saying science is "man-made", the goal is to make science less reliable than "God's Word".
What Biblical literalists overlook is that Biblical interpretations are also man-made constructs. Therefore, a literal interpretation of Genesis is just as much "man-made" as science.
They also overlook that Young Earth Creationism is a man-made construct based upon a literal reading of Genesis 1, but going far beyond that literal reading.
Upvote
0
Being an old fogey, to me science isn't just laws or principles men have formulated (eg. Newton's Law of Gravity) but the very existance of gravity itself. I'm probably not being very clear here (Hence the Name) but I hope you understand what I mean.
"Science" being defined in my original post as a man-made construct is almost verbatim what a poster in anyther thread told me. I made the assumption that he meant all science however you wanted to look at it. /me shrugs. But then, I'm just.......
Upvote
0
Really, we view everything through a man made construct, from science to religion. However, science generally has less opinion in it than religion does.
Upvote
0
Plumbdumb:
If we say 'science' is the totality of accepted scientific theory, then yes, it is a man-made construct. Do we know it's right? No, not at all. Every one of our theories could be wrong. We don't have any evidence in support of this (else said theories would be falsified), but it is certainly possible.
If we say 'science' is the totality of accepted scientific theory, then yes, it is a man-made construct. Do we know it's right? No, not at all. Every one of our theories could be wrong. We don't have any evidence in support of this (else said theories would be falsified), but it is certainly possible.
Upvote
0
Mechanical Bliss
Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
Upvote
0
"However you wanted to look at it" was probably a poor choice of words. "However you want to define it" may have been better. But, as I told you in a PM Mechanical Bliss, I was educated in a galaxy far, far away, in a time long, long ago. Old thought patterns don't die easily, and some never do die.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
