🚀 go-pugleaf

You write : 

 Philosophy is the context of science. Science (inc/math) cannot prove
 nor refute philosophy. Philosophy is the study of the basic facts of existence
 whereas science is the study of non-basic facts. 
 ...
 Philosophy must not be made consistent with science. It is science
 which must be made consistent with philosophy. Science always contains an
 implicit philosophy which must be judged without any reference to science.
 ...
 Apart from the intellectual fraud, philosophy causes science.

-------------------------------------

These statements are provoking and therefore interesting, but sadly they are
mostly wrong.

- Philosophy is not the cause of science. The cause and origin of science is
curiosity. 

- Science *is* the study of basic facts, in contrast to what you assume. For
example, physics studies time, space, matter, interactions, motion, change. All
of these are basic facts. Theoretical physics is trying hard to find more basic
ones, at the moment, and perhaps we can tell you more in a few years.

- Science can very well prove or refute philosophical ideas. It has done so many
times. Creation of life, supernatural forces in daily life, infinity of the
universe, and many more are philosophical ideas that have been shown false by
careful observation.

- Natural science does not contain implicit philosophy (whatever that means).
And surely it is not to be judged by philosophy. Science is to be judged
by facts, not by philosophy. (The middle age is over, happily.)

- You should define in more precise terms what you mean by philosophy. From your
use of the word (as in " an implicit philosophy " ), you seem to use the term
as another word for "beliefs".  But to provoke you a little more, there are no
beliefs in science (at least not in natural sciences). No belief is needed to be
curious about the world around. 


		Cheers
				Christoph



Christoph Schiller                       
Philips Research Laboratories            It has been proven scientifically  
Eindhoven, The Netherlands               that male rats are more attracted
schiller@prl.philips.nl                  to female rats than to tennis balls.