Re: [asa] HPSS - Survey of Views

From: Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
Date: Fri Apr 04 2008 - 19:41:00 EDT

Greg,
 I've read only Kuhn and read about Popper's views. Though I'm interested in knowing what they have to say, I'm not inclined to spend the time reading them. Nor, to my knowledge, do I know many scientists who do. Most of us prefer to just do the science. We know it when we see it but can't always define it. Are you indirectly confirming that all the paradigm changes they consider still retain the core of a belief that science is possible?
  Moorad, I'm not sure I understand your question but I do believe that the fact that anything exists at all and that what does exist is coherent and orderly is one of the more potent arguments for the existence of God.
  Randy
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gregory Arago
  To: Alexanian, Moorad ; Randy Isaac ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 5:27 PM
  Subject: RE: [asa] HPSS - Survey of Views

  "But I wonder if any of these 4 (or others) philosophers of science ever considered a paradigm shift that included abandoning the idea of a consistent order in the universe?" - Randy Isaac

  Yes, those 4 are all philosophers of science. But also, as I pointed out in the previous post, they are trained in physics, mathematics and psychology. So they are also 'scientists' as far as the term goes. As to your above question, Randy, it makes me wonder if you have read any of them, especially Feyerabend. This indeed was the main purpose of the thread to discover. Thanks to those who have already commented on this survey in public and private. - G.A.

  "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu> wrote:
    Scripturally, God sustains His creation, which means "no God, no nothing." Therefore, to what extent God sustaining the creation shows up in the existence and temporal development of all that there is?

    Moorad

    ________________________________

    From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Randy Isaac
    Sent: Fri 4/4/2008 10:56 AM
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: Re: [asa] HPSS - Survey of Views

    Jim,
    Maybe we need to differentiate between the perspective of a given
    scientist and that which develops from the collective perspective of the
    scientific community. Certainly, each scientist approaches the data from a
    paradigmatic framework and is not (cannot, I think) be "purely objective",
    whatever that might mean. However, part of the essence of scientific
    methodology is independent corroboration and reproducibility and acceptance
    by the collective community of scientists in that particular field. In
    principle, this means that scientists from all sorts of different
    sociological and philosophical perspectives weigh in on the matter. This
    doesn't mean that complete objectivity without influence by any paradigm is
    achieved but it does make a big difference in sifting out spurious results
    that might be unique to a given paradigm. What needs to remain in common to
    all paradigms is the core belief that there is order in the universe and
    that science is possible

    This core belief is what differentiates many creationist and ID
    presuppositions. Creationists typically claim significant discontinuities in
    the laws of nature. This means that whatever order there is in the universe
    was different in the past, the so-called non-uniformitarian assumption.
    Some, though not all, ID perspectives include the idea that certain aspects
    of the order in the universe bear the hallmarks of intelligent manipulation
    rather than typical cause and effect relationships.

    As a result, when the paradigm that shapes one's conclusions differs at
    such a basic level, all sorts of red flags are raised. It's no wonder that
    conflicts ensue. But I wonder if any of these 4 (or others) philosophers of
    science ever considered a paradigm shift that included abandoning the idea
    of a consistent order in the universe? My guess is that when they talk of
    paradigm shifts, they reall mean something very different.

    Randy

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "James Mahaffy"
    To:
    Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 7:48 AM
    Subject: Re: [asa] HPSS - Survey of Views

> Folks
>
> Kuhn -- yes and he was very important in helping me understand that
> science does not work just objectively
> Popper -- am somewhat aware of him but have not read him and way back when
> I picked up one of his books did not find it easy to read.
> Others -- not really.
>
>
> It is interesting how often on this group science appears in many posts to
> be objective and not really influenced by paradigms.
>
> James Mahaffy (mahaffy@dordt.edu) Phone: 712 722-6279
> 498 4th Ave NE
> Biology Department FAX : 712 722-1198
> Dordt College, Sioux Center IA 51250-1697
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

    To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
    "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

    To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
    "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Apr 4 19:42:11 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 04 2008 - 19:42:11 EDT