Re: Definition of science and of scientific method.

Article View: sci.philosophy.tech

Article #1140

Back to sci.philosophy.tech Previous Next

#1140

From: Steve
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1987 12:45

15 lines
1429 bytes

In article <6617@reed.UUCP>, mojo@reed.UUCP (Eddie [Ex-Delivery Boy]) writes:
> In article <813@klipper.cs.vu.nl> biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) writes:
> >5) Science starts (or: sciences start) from the results of the philosophers'
> >work
> I don't think _philosophers_ are a prerequisite for science.
> 
> >6) The definition of "science", and of scientific method, is by its very
> >nature a philosophical, not a scientifical matter.

I don't see why the "scientist" and "philosopher" are disjoint.  After all,
Leibniz (I'm not opening that mess again) was a philosopher and scientist;
as was Newton and a whole host of others.  The split is relatively recent.

The philosopher's job is to ask such questions as what to believe, accept
as truth, etc.  The scientist's job is to generate it.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <300@hubcap.UUCP>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!hubcap!steve

References: <6693@allegra.UUCP> <1664@tekcrl.TEK.COM> <1084@aecom.YU.EDU> <6617@reed.UUCP>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!hubcap!steve
From: steve@hubcap.UUCP (Steve )
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Definition of science and of scientific method.
Message-ID: <300@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 16-Jul-87 08:45:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: hubcap.300
Posted: Thu Jul 16 08:45:25 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Jul-87 06:36:15 EDT
References: <6693@allegra.UUCP> <1664@tekcrl.TEK.COM> <1084@aecom.YU.EDU> <6617@reed.UUCP>
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 15
Summary: Why the dichotomy of science and philosophy?

Reply to Parent Message