Re: Real Science (was Re: serious)

From: Howard J. Van Till <>
Date: Thu Jan 08 2004 - 10:05:46 EST

>From: "Dr. Blake Nelson" <>

> 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). ;)


You are quite correct. I had no intention to say that only the natural
sciences are "real sciences." But I thought that the "natural sciences" (my
home territory) offered sufficient diversity to make the point.

Received on Thu Jan 8 10:07:18 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 08 2004 - 10:07:19 EST