RE: Post-Empiricism Science: A little surprised

From: Alexanian, Moorad (
Date: Wed Sep 17 2003 - 08:38:10 EDT

  • Next message: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Evolution and Salvation"

    Ancients used to explain eclipses and why the sun rises but could not
    make predictions. The essence of a scientific theory is the ability to
    make predictions and not merely give explanations, which is pure




    -----Original Message-----
    From: [] On
    Behalf Of
    Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:39 AM
    Subject: Re: Post-Empiricism Science: A little surprised


    In a message dated 9/17/03 1:46:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

    The evolutionary paradigm is just as religious and sacred as a
    paradigm. The only difference is that the evolutionary paradigm is
    based upon
    and accepted by blind faith. It is blind because it cannot be confirmed
    anyone who could know.

    T. Kuhn wrote that the strength of a hypothesis is in its explanatory
    value. The explanatory value of evolutionary theory is so strong and
    there is so much evidence for it that to dispute it at this point is to
    dig your head in the sand.

    "If a paradigm is ever to triumph it must gain some first supporters,
    men who will develop it to
    the point where hard headed arguments can be produced and multiplied.
    And even those
    arguments when they come are not individually decisive.

    Because scientists are reasonable men, one or another argument will
    ultimately persuade many
    of them. But there is no single argument that can or should persuade
    them all. Rather than a
    single group conversion, what occurs is an increasing shift in the
    distribution of professional

    At the start, a new candidate for paradigm may have few supporters, and
    on occasion the
    supporters' motives may be suspect. Nevertheless, if they are competent,
    they will improve it,
    explore its possibilities and show what it would be like to belong to
    the community guided by
    it. And as that goes on, if the paradigm is one destined to win its
    fight, the number and
    strength of the professional arguments in its favor will increase.

    More scientists will then be converted and the exploration of the new
    paradigm will go on.
    Gradually the number of experiments, instruments, articles and books
    based upon the
    paradigm will multiply. Still more men, convinced of the new view's
    fruitfulness will adopt the
    new mode of practicing normal science, until at last only a few elderly
    hold-outs remain.

    Though the historian can always find men, Priestley, for instance, who
    were unreasonable to
    resist for as long as they did, he will not find a point at which
    resistance becomes illogical or
    unscientific. At most he may wish to say that the man who continues to
    resist after his whole
    profession has been converted has ipso facto ceased to be a scientist."

                           The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas
    S. Kuhns
                                   Chapter: Resolution of Revolutions

    rich faussette

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Sep 17 2003 - 08:39:33 EDT