> I think that most philosophers agree that the philosophy of science is a
> part of philosophy. But wouldn't they also say that the whole of
> philosophy goes well beyond the realms of science?
> Menno RUBINGH wrote:
> > Philosophy"s ". . .ultimate *goal* is
> > practical, and firmly embedded in down-to-earth, practical, pragmatic,
> > technology."
I don't see how the two can be separated.
Science is "natural philosophy" which apprehends
the entire natural world. As science (linguistics,
cognitive science, etc) make inroads into a
science of language and understanding and
consciousness, the line is blurred again, some
Godel's incompleteness theorem would seem
to typify the interlockedness of the two.
Meanwhile, we all have our own personal
relationship to science and the mystery
that comes with it. For only a very few
does science seem to evaporate the mystery,
for most, I contend, it merely adds beauty
and complexity to the simple mysteries
such as existence, duality of form and
function, form and substance.
I do not see how, until we become machines
or Vulcans, that one can exclude the other.
And even then, we suspect both machines
and Vulcans of being capable of apprehending
beauty, art, philosophy and the rest of us
of accepting beauty, art and philosophy as
not excluding science.
Posting to email@example.com from steve <firstname.lastname@example.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 14 2000 - 17:25:23 GMT