Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Fate Of Twist
Science is not merely a bundle of theory. Science is a real world activity that human beings and human communities spend their time engaged in, making their livelihoods from, thinking, doing, training, practicing, mentoring, building, having fun with, arguing about, and so on
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
There is so much to science, to the practical everyday lifeworld of scientists, students of science, people affected by science, skeptics But at the same time, there is so much more in the world than science.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
Science can talk about almost anything, but it can only talk about them in a very narrow set of ways, and towards a very narrow set of purposes.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
Almost all of our dealing with the world, talking about it, looking at it, reacting to it, changing it, is non-scientific* in the sense that that's not the sort of thing scientists engage in when practicing science. (to be contrasted with un- or anti-scientific which is contrary)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
While scientists can skateboard, unless they are a kinesiologist or something, they are not skateboarding as/in their capacity of being a scientist. And even if they are, they are skateboarding in a different way, towards different goals as a kid in the skate park
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
> Science can easily block you from [having a more complete ontology], if your conception of ontology is purely scientific.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Fate Of Twist 19. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @FateOfTwist_
I'm not sure who exactly to point to for literature on this conception of science. Neopragmatists and scientific practice people are all good. (later) Putnam and van Fraassen are good. Hasok Chang is good but needs more than a pinch of salt
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"