RE: Real Science (was Re: serious)

From: Alexanian, Moorad <>
Date: Thu Jan 08 2004 - 21:51:17 EST

Not quite! It is true that all sorts of verbal questions can be so asked but one must dwell on the concepts and notions used in the questions. For instance, if one asks “Does Jane love Tarzan?” and the answer is “Yes,” the problem is that Jane, Tarzan, and love cannot be characterized by purely physical devices. Physics questions are all characterized by terms that a purely physical in nature and thus amenable to measurements by purely physical devices.



        -----Original Message-----
        From: Glenn Morton []
        Sent: Thu 1/8/2004 8:58 PM
        To: Alexanian, Moorad; John W Burgeson
        Subject: RE: Real Science (was Re: serious)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []On
> Behalf Of Alexanian, Moorad
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 3:50 PM
> To: John W Burgeson
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: Real Science (was Re: serious)
> If the data that makes up the subject matter in the social
> sciences could, in principle, be all collected by purely physical
> devices, then social science can be totally reduced to physics. I
> do not believe the latter. Social sciences must include aspects
> of reality that are non-physical. Ergo my comment. I do not know
> about Peter Berger---just looked him up in google. My comment is
> so obvious that I do not know how to convince you.
        If one developed a computer program to ask verbal questions and thus perform a survey and then do voice print analysis to understand what the response was, social science data can be collected via machine, which is a purely physical device. Does that make it reducible to physics? I wouldn't think so. But the technology to do what I say above is here and now.
Received on Thu Jan 8 21:51:26 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 08 2004 - 21:51:26 EST