From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Oct 28 2004 - 05:45:06 BST
Hello,
No changing it to a noun doesn't help because as a noun the definition I most associate with the word is:
empiricism n. the practice of relying on observation and experiment especially in the natural sciences
As you describe below science validates only certain expeirences by calling them empirical evidence, your empiricism philosophy widens the scope of experiences but they use a different meaning of emprical than science uses and science's unacceptance of some of the experiences is due to an incorrect assumption (materialistic assumption)
When you were discounting Platt's resurrection example you switched to the empirical definition I believe science uses.
Under the empirical philosophy you offer I don't see how you discount "false" experiences without that "illegal" switch.
Again with the ESP example-- for the experience to be labeled as empircal evidence using the definition I associate with empirical it not only has to be observable/measurable but it also has to be replicated. Maybe if I ask it this way---
If I say I experience quality in a painting how is that different from someone saying they experience ESP. You say in the emprical philosophy you don't accept what theysay they experience---so how do you "accept" that artistic experience.
Erin
Mark Steven Heyman <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com> wrote:
Hi Erin,
Well, I must admit that I am unable to understand your confusion.
Science's assumptions are not incorrect, just limited. Science isn't
opposed to empiricism; it's more like empiricism's materialist little
brat. Science is concerned only with experience of the measurable
kind, sticking out its tongue at anything unmeasurable. Rational
empiricist philosophy embraces all experience, measurable or not.
Maybe it will help if you focus on the noun "empiricism" rather than
the adjective "empirical."
Best,
Mark (sh)
On 27 Oct 2004 at 17:55, Erin wrote:
But the real empirical evidence was what was observable, and the
reports of experience was what was unobservable. So to distinguish
the "experiences" you reverted to the scientific sense of the word.
I still think it is telling that you use the word "real" with what is
observable. I didn't mean an apology of science. I meant it seems
like it is an apologyTO science. Shouldn't science be the one
changing, since it is the one with incorrect assumptions.Again I
know no field "owns" a word, but empirical for me is associated
withhow thesciences uses itand they demand for the experience to
be measured/observed I thought. By adopting the term and stretching
it to situations I don't think the scientific world would acceptit,
it just seems apologetic.
Erin
Mark Steven Heyman wrote:
Me again.
I was distinguishing real empirical evidence from reports of
experience presented as empirical evidence. Sorry for the
confusion.
BTW, science requires no apology from me or anyone else. It is an
incredibly powerful and useful system of thought and investigation.
Anyone who denies this is simply not paying attention to the world
around them. My only quibble with science is its lack of interest in
making value judgements. But that's why we have ethical philosophies
like the Metaphysics of Quality.
Best again,
Mark
-- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is everything." -- Henri Poincare' MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archives: Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archives: Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 28 2004 - 05:47:37 BST