🚀 go-pugleaf

miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:

> I'm a linguist, and though you might think linguistics has little
> relevance to the issue you raised, I think it does.  The problem in
> the public's perception of cosmology is that the public takes
> what scientists say about the universe as a set of *assertions*
> while the speech act that cosmologists are actually performing is
> that of *assumption* or *working assumption.*  The difference is
> important.
> 

      The new physics is long past questions of working assumptions,
when generations of scientists have come and gone utilizing those same
assumptions. Certain principles become so ingrained they are taken
as true, and if you argue that they are just assumptions you will
provoke some heated debate -- even amoungst philosophers -- as Kuhn
and others have shown. There is a strong desire to see science as a
window on absolute truth at any given time, with the modest admission
that the window might not be perfectly transparent. This is 
understandable amoungst lab techs, but unfortunately is prevalent
on all levels. As many people are beginning to realize, there is
alot to be gained from a study of the sociology of science, not to
mention the linguistics.


> -- 
> ********************************** +.............................+
> *- Ken <miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>* :All opinions expressed herein:
> *There is no privileged position.* :are my own and are not to be :
> *	-God, Derrida, others    * : attributed to my employer   :
> ********************************** +.............................+


      John E. Snodgrass [snodgras@cyber.net (mail)]

--                    
INTERNET:  snodgras@netlink.cts.com (John Snodgrass)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!snodgras
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115