Real Science (was Re: serious)

From: Dr. Blake Nelson <bnelson301@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu Jan 08 2004 - 09:37:56 EST

--- "Howard J. Van Till" <hvantill@chartermi.net>
wrote:

(SNIP)

> By the way, if you intended to say or imply that
> physics is the only REAL
> science, I heartily disagree. The several
> disciplines that comprise the
> natural sciences are equally "real" science. These
> disciplines may differ
> somewhat in their styles of empirical investigation
> and theory
> formulation/evaluation, but that does not make any
> one of them any less real
> than the others. I would suggest that most of these
> stylistic differences
> arise from differences in the complexity and/or
> physical accessibility of
> the systems under scrutiny and differences in the
> historical development of
> the several professional communities involved.

By the way, did you intend to imply that only natural
sciences are "real" science and that social sciences
are not? That would seem uncharacteristically
exclusive of you and depend on a particular, unstated
definition of science (since empirical investigation,
theory formulation, etc. that you mention all inhere
in the social sciences -- or at least subparts
thereof). ;)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
Received on Thu Jan 8 09:38:13 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 08 2004 - 09:38:14 EST