100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: I Dont Get It | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
How to build a bomb is science. Should the bomb be used is philosophy. How to cure AIDS is science. How to approach the cure of AIDS is philosophy. How to reverse the effects of mankind on the planet is science. How to manage the reversal is philosophy. Almost any meaningful discussion of one leads to a discussion of the other. Many great scientists were great philosophers too. Its called mingle2ing.  I'll agree with that....but the difference needs to be mutually understood. Thats the issue I think |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moreover, all of logic depends upon accepting basic premises most of which cannot be proven or even demonstrated to make sense. One has to begin accepting something... at some point in time... without foundation for it. James, Knowledge itself is the only means that we have to ground our knowledge... circular? Indeed! Yet that holds true in every case. Layer upon layer it is built. If one digs deep enough, the previous piece of knowledge which grounds the latter one is always without foundation, as is every other grounding for every other piece of knowledge that mankind possesses... The grounds beneath the foundation always disappear somewhere. Should that be reason to believe that all that we have come to know is for not? Is it possible to be mistaken in all that we know? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How can they place "Science" and "Philosophy" in the same "Community" when they are two total different things? Do you agree or disagree? That'd be like putting Elmo and Chris Rock on a TV show together. They're both funny, yes...but two total different kinds of humor. Let me offer this answer: May-be whoever put these two together in one forum, knew that all bad science is based on "good" philosophy. |
|
|
|
|
