ROG AGREES WITH JON ON LIMITATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY
JON:
Its all about faith. The harmony of a particular belief. Pirsig is concerned
that we let science tell us, in effect, what it's OK to have faith in
(gravity, time, etc). And since science has been so spectacularly successful
over the years, we don't question the heart of science, namely the
sci-method, very much. Morality has no objective reality according to
science, but thankfully many people still believe in it anyway!
ROG:
Interesting observations. Thanks for sharing them. I will re-enforce your
point that of course non-objective reality exists, as it is specifically
outside the domain of science. How can something that is specifically and
carefully excluded not exist? You are also right that it is amusing how some
extremists jump from science's suspicion of non-objective knowledge and turn
it into a wholesale rejection of non-objective knowledge.
BTW, I don't think that the problem is so much with scientific methodology,
as much as it is with overly-simplistic paradigms that people have based on
the unstated assumptions of science that are then misapplied outside of
non-objective realms (I use "objective" as publicly verifiable.)
I did a list a few weaks ago spelling out all the limitations of science.
There is no problem in practicing science, the problem comes from MISAPPLYING
science to assume it says more than it really does.
Rog
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 - 16:00:56 BST