Actually the ideas in my posting arose from a physics seminar I took as an undergraduate with R. Bruce Lindsay, a distinguished physicist and also philosopher of science. The argument that we can never know anything absolutely is well accepted in physics where it has led to the understanding that everything is open to question.
A good example of this is Newton's Laws of Motion, the most thoroughly validated set of scientific statements ever -- but it turns out not to be correct. I think that in the hard sciences my "sci-fi philosophical argument" would probably not raise an eyebrow. But I think that Wayne Tyson came closer to the mark when he quoted Jacob Bronowski, "The people followed Hitler because he was CERTAIN!" Certainty trumps science, even when it is nonsense. The endless conflict between science and religion in the US owes much to the fact that religion offers certainty. April Dianna Kane may not like it, but many of us, when asked "Are you absolutely positive that your scientific results are 100% correct?" are likely to look down and meekly answer, "no". Bill Silvert ----- Original Message ----- From: "April Dianna Kane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 7:13 PM Subject: Re: Science Scientific Uncertainty What does "scientific uncertainty" mean--exactly? > In response to Bill Silvert's message: While interesting and amusing, > I don't know if this type of sci-fi philosophical argument belongs in > scientific debates.
