Time

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by BeBro
Do you belong to those which think science = only natural sciences like physics etc?

Yes

That is an opinion.

No. Science is an easily definable word, meaning you can empirically try and realize something to be true universally, or something which depends from these proved axioms.

Too bad humanist hippies have lately kidnapped the word to mean just about everything they want to paint in a positive light since "science" has a positive connotation these days.

I'm looking at you, aivo. History and linguistics ARE important, I'm not trying to put you down. They're not just science, no matter how Orwellian your word-play gets.

[Meticulous Man]

Actually Spec and possibly Kuci (?) are themselves proponents of a philosophy called Positivism.

Positivism is a philosophy developed by Auguste Comte (widely regarded as the first true sociologist) at the beginning of the 19th century that stated that the only authentic knowledge is scientific knowledge, and that such knowledge can only come from positive affirmation of theories through strict scientific method. This view is sometimes referred to as a scientist ideology, and is often shared by technocrats who believe in the necessary progress through scientific progress. As an approach to the philosophy of science deriving from Enlightenment thinkers like Pierre-Simon Laplace (and many others), positivism was first systematically theorized by Comte, who saw the scientific method as replacing metaphysics in the history of thought, and who observed the circular dependence of theory and observation in science. Comte was thus one of the leading thinkers of the social evolutionism thought. Brazil's national motto, Ordem e Progresso ("Order and Progress") was taken from Comte's positivism, also influential in Poland. Positivism is the most evolved stage of society in anthropological Evolutionism, the point where science and rational explanation for scientific phenomena develops.

...

Positivism is also depicted as "the view that all true knowledge is scientific," and that all things are ultimately measurable. Because of its "close association with reductionism," positivism and reductionism involve the view that "entities of one kind... are reducible to entities of another," such as societies to numbers, or mental events to chemical events. It also involves the contention that "processes are reducible to physiological, physical or chemical events," and even that "social processes are reducible to relationships between and actions of individuals," or that "biological organisms are reducible to physical systems."

[Jon Miller]

When did they ever say that the only authetic knowledge is scientific knowledge (in this thread?)

I am a scientist.. philosophy is not science. However, I don't think that the only authetic knowledge is scientific knowledge. Denoting the difference between things is not the same as saying that something doesn't exist.

Jon Miller

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Aivo½so
What's the difference between a fact and an opinion?

...what I just said. facts are proved and then empirically universally realized. opinions are just theories you're coming up with and trying to prove with other opinions. there is no mathematically, logically, objectively proven method of knowing if they're True or not.

please read this: http://www.physics.brocku.ca/etc/car...t_science.html

[Spec]

Originally posted by BeBro


That's like saying I wanna see the day when musicians invent more fuel-efficient cars!

Wtf!?! You cant be serious...

Absolutly not.

I will disregard that comment.

Spec.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by VJ
They're not just science, no matter how Orwellian your word-play gets.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Meticulous Man]

Jon Miller: I was just trying to point out that there's really no way to get around having some kind of a philosophical point of departure.

[Jon Miller]

Science is divided up to two categories, soft sciences and hard sciences.

Soft sciences are those like Econ and the like. Hard sciences are ones like physics. While many think that many of the soft sciences will later be hard sciences, they aren't right now.

Other things, like Mathematics, aren't sciences although they are valuable.

Jon Miller

[Spec]

VJ

Spec.

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Philosophers gstarted calling themselves scientists and mathematicians when they realized there was a lot more money in it.

well put. Especially in Europe, people are trying to raise the credibility of their field by injecting "science" into it's name. "Hey kid, how's it going? What are you studying in here?" "Literature-science".

[Spec]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
Other things, like Mathematics, aren't sciences although they are valuable.

Jon Miller

Math may not be science (thought some may argu that point of view), but there is no science without math.

Spec.

[Spec]

Originally posted by VJ

well put. Especially in Europe, people are trying to raise the credibility of their field by injecting "science" into it's name. "Hey kid, how's it going? What are you studying in here?" "Literature-science".

Spec.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
String Theory isn't really physics.

Whatever you say, Lee

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Spec


Wtf!?! You cant be serious...

Sure it's not. It's of the same level as your comment, which related philosophy to something it cannot do (curing cancer), and which is not the purpose of it.

[Spec]

But science is.

There's your difference.

Originally posted by BeBro
Philosophy is science.

Philosophy is not and never will be science.

Get my point?

Spec.