Article View: sci.lang
Article #3096Re: linguistics vs philology
From: Bayla Singer
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 1994 22:57
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 1994 22:57
16 lines
1455 bytes
1455 bytes
(Marc A. Belanger) writes: >I stand corrected. But would you still say that a science has to make >predictions in order to be considered scientific? > > - Marc. Taxonomy is generally considered a science, and any 'predictions' it makes are really beside the point. I guess the 'prediction' is implicit -- 'any organism will logically fall somewhere in this classification'. Or, 'you're not likely to find something that is a cold-blooded lactating hexaped.' So the answer to your question depends on what you mean by 'prediction.' Any knowledge system has this sort of implicit 'predictions' -- some you wouldn't call sciences, too. --bayla
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<30ka5b$8gj@netnews.upenn.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!bsingerReferences:
<16FF49A71.3914MABE@vm1.ulaval.ca> <307465$ikl@netnews.upenn.edu> <16FF9A351.3914MABE@vm1.ulaval.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10b097,826aa1babacf3c92 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b097,public X-Google-Thread: 10a20a,46af33b4381bd91f X-Google-Attributes: gid10a20a,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-07-20 17:28:33 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!bsinger From: bsinger@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Bayla Singer) Newsgroups: sci.lang,bit.listserv.words-l Subject: Re: linguistics vs philology Date: 20 Jul 1994 22:57:47 GMT Organization: nope Lines: 17 Distribution: world Message-ID: <30ka5b$8gj@netnews.upenn.edu> References: <16FF49A71.3914MABE@vm1.ulaval.ca> <307465$ikl@netnews.upenn.edu> <16FF9A351.3914MABE@vm1.ulaval.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: eniac.seas.upenn.edu