Yes, it is relying on faith to postulate any testable theory. The testing is
the validation (but it's destruct testing!), but the leap of faith comes
first. Science doesn't make hypotheses. Scientists do, but they rely on
faith to do so. Spock was misguided.
But the fact that evience is useful is why we tend to go with the
best-supported proposal so far, even when it clearly doesn't work (which is
the fate of all theories..?)
cheers
ppl
----- Original Message -----
From: "PzEph" <etinarcardia@lineone.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: 09 December 2000 00:15
Subject: Re: MD mind without matter
> ELEPHANT TO PETER:
>
> ELEPHANT HAD WRITTEN:
> >> Let's have Quality science with clear criteria and definitions that is
> >> supported by evidence, and not a religion of neurological psychology.
>
> PETER WROTE:
> > I have to say, though, that inasmuch as 'evidence' can be said to exist,
> > "mind as caused by brain-stuff" [the stuff is wonderfully undefined]
seems
> > better supported than many alternative explanations.Certainly, any
> > scientific school must rely heavily on faith in order to postulate
theories
> > which can be tested; I'm not sure that this makes it a religion...?
>
> ELEPHANT:
> It's not relying on faith to postulate a testable theory, is it? However
> you conceive of evidence, it's a useful thing to have. What I think makes
> neuropschcology into a kind of religion is that, to even get in at the
door,
> you have to believe that neuron research is going to one day tell you
> everything about human psychology. If that's not a religious dogma then I
> don't know what is. Probably there are some scientists who treat this
> merely as an interesting hypothesis - good for them, they must be sane.
But
> it's the nutters that I'm talking about.
>
> Re 'no better supported explanations': In my earlier posting I was
> suggesting that the very assumption that there is something to be
explained
> here demonstrates anti MOQ aspects. I wasn't offering a different
> explanation, I was suggesting that an explanation, either direction,
> mind-brain or brain-mind is only necessary if you make the error of
> postulating these two pictures as substantial.
>
> Pzeph
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:54 BST