View Single Post
Old 06-08-2010, 04:00 AM   #84
Sparrow
Wizard
Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sparrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,395
Karma: 1358132
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Device: Palm TX, CyBook Gen3
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlorenceArt View Post


Could you explain what you think science takes "on trust"?
I think science takes on trust those things it regards as axiomatic.

For example, a lot of science is maths and rests on mathematical and logical axioms, 'Pi in the Sky: counting, thinking and being' by John D. Barrow is a fascinating book about the philosophy of maths, that explores whether what science takes on trust is philosophically valid.

Opening paragraph:
"A mystery lurks beneath the magic carpet of science, something that scientists have not been telling, something too shocking to mention except in rather esoterically refined circles; that at the root of the success of twentieth century science there lies a deeply 'religious' belief - a belief in an unseen and transcendental world that controls us in an unexplained way, yet upon which we seem to exert no influence whatsoever."

Sounds not unlike Plato's world of forms.

Last edited by Sparrow; 06-08-2010 at 04:07 AM.
Sparrow is offline   Reply With Quote