Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #994Re: Knowledge and the Academics
From: paul gallagher
Date: Sun, 24 May 1987 01:07
Date: Sun, 24 May 1987 01:07
16 lines
1543 bytes
1543 bytes
In article <8705220612.AA16224@brahms.Berkeley.EDU> obnoxio@brahms.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: > >Sorry to disillusion you, Richard, but compared to the *real* intellec- >tual achievements of this century (within science) . . . the "flowering of >the social and behavioral sciences" is going to remain one long gigan- >tic eyesore and an embarrassing piffle of a joke. How do you distinguish science from non-science? Also how can the non-sciences straighten up their act? I've recently read some articles in historical biology (on the origin of bone), and I don't see how the sorts of evidence and the sort of reasoning the authors use differs from those used in the history of human society (which is not to say there is no difference)? How is a fact or a theory in a science like paleontology any more certain than one in history or a social science? PG
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2068@husc6.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!husc4!gallagherReferences:
<669@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU> <667@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU> <8705220612.AA16224@brahms.Berkeley.EDU>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!seismo!husc6!husc4!gallagher From: gallagher@husc4.HARVARD.EDU (paul gallagher) Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Subject: Re: Knowledge and the Academics Message-ID: <2068@husc6.UUCP> Date: Sat, 23-May-87 21:07:01 EDT Article-I.D.: husc6.2068 Posted: Sat May 23 21:07:01 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 24-May-87 01:47:11 EDT References: <669@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU> <667@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU> <8705220612.AA16224@brahms.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: news@husc6.UUCP Reply-To: gallagher@husc4.UUCP (paul gallagher) Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center Lines: 16