Subject:
|
Re: Critical Thinking
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 4 Dec 2000 21:17:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
531 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
>
> > If you consider that creationsim has been around since Moses penned the book
> > of Genesis - and even before that though it wasn't written down, I guess you
> > can call creationism "current".
> > By your standard, then, most every theory known to man is "current".
>
> Not true! The Geocentric earth theory is certainly not current to any
> rational way of thinking, nor is the reproduction-by-stork theory. I label
> creationism a current theory because certain camps are actively promoting
> its inclusion in public school curricula, whereas few scholars today assert
> that equal time should be devoted to phrenology.
Ah - "current" to you means currently in vogue, whereas to me it meant recent.
Ok.
> > Also, "scientific", which you refer to, is a funny thing - it gets redefined
> > every time someone has evidence that doesn't fit the accepted framework.
> > (I'll not get into that).
>
> But I'll be happy to! "Scientific" doesn't change; what you're getting at
> is that science's understanding of the universe changes, and that's as it
> should be. I discuss this elsewhere in the thread.
Sorry, science does change - at least the way we understand it.
(Science is not how we understand things. Science is the framework we use to
understand things. Just because we don't have an explaination for something
doesn't meant it doesn't exist, or didn't occur.)
Science experiences major paradigm shifts every once in awhile. You would
probably claim that science is recent, I would say it's millenia old. My
perspective on science is a bit longer, and from that view I see it shifting in
how it interprets reality... :-) (another topic, I'd like to avoid)
-Jon
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Critical Thinking
|
| (...) You're right to call me on that; I wrote that improperly and more-or-less in direct conflict to my overall argument. Science changes in that it is progressive and cumulative, letting go of obsolete or outmoded theories, or at any rate (...) (24 years ago, 4-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
| (...) Not true! The Geocentric earth theory is certainly not current to any rational way of thinking, nor is the reproduction-by-stork theory. I label creationism a current theory because certain camps are actively promoting its inclusion in public (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
