>
> Personally, I think philosophy is on par with science.
Good lord, how? Is it as empirical? Does it create as provably valid
models? Or is it simply as worthy an area of study as science?
I think the Par you are considering would not include your going to a
philosopher for medical treatment, right?
> But they are in
> two different categories. Science is limited to negation, the
> demonstration that some sentence (or class of sentences) does not hold
> (here, now, anywhere, anywhen).
Er, how does Newton deal with negation? Isn't a clear set of equations
saying what *will* happen? I mean of course one can say, It Is Not The Case
That F=ma Is Not True, but really, just how can we think of science limited
to negation?
Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for all the rich topics of
investigation we pursue, philosophy included. However, I don't see that
they are on par in any way other than you can study it.
-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
