RE: definition of science

From: <kbmill@ksu.edu>
Date: Mon Apr 25 2005 - 13:41:14 EDT

Terry:

> Is biology "physical" in your use of the word? How about psychology?
>
> I'm not trying to invoke a sense of vital force here, but
> philosophers of science, especially philosophers of biology, have
> long advocated an autonomy of biology that makes it irreducible to
> physics and chemistry (even though it may be fully built upon a
> physics and chemistry substratum). In other words, there are
> scientific concepts, laws, theories, etc. that can't be reduced to
> some physical-chemical expression--they are expressed only in terms
> of the biological world.
>
> This is why I want to distinguish between physical and natural.

I used the term "physical" to include all of physical reality (matter
and energy) and thus would include biology, neuroscience, etc. And no
I do not believe that everything is reducible to physics. My intended
distinction is between the physical (natural) and supernatural.

Keith
Received on Mon Apr 25 13:42:26 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 25 2005 - 13:42:29 EDT