On Mar 29, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Gautam Sarup wrote:
On 3/29/06, Bob Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Science today studies much that isn't real. That's a 19th century
definition.
Bob
Bob,
I'd say that if the mystics want to change the definition of
science they
can't. Science is still (and always will be) the study of
reality. The
"study of non-reality" if such a thing is possible will always be
mysticism.
There is no logical need to morph one into the other.
Cheers,
Gautam
Some definitions of science. Reality is not mentioned in any of them:
the study of the natural world
education.jlab.org/beamsactivity/6thgrade/vocabulary/
systemized knowledge derived through experimentation, observation,
and study. Also, the methodology used to acquire this knowledge.
www.carm.org/evolution/evoterms.htm
A branch of knowledge based on objectivity and involving observation
and experimentation.
www.spaceforspecies.ca/glossary/s.htm
Primarily the pursuit and study of physical and material knowledge,
particularly in a systematic and organized manner, of spiritual matters.
www.gnmagazine.org/bsc/03/glossary.htm
The arrangement of concepts in their rational connection to exhibit
them as an organic, progressive whole. See Introduction, Lectures on
the History of Philosophy 7.
www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/texts/Hegel%20Glossary.htm
The body of related courses concerned with knowledge of the physical
and biological world and with the processes of discovering and
validating this knowledge.
nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/glossary/s.asp
a method of learning about the world by applying the principles of
the scientific method, which includes making empirical observations,
proposing hypotheses to explain those observations, and testing those
hypotheses in valid and reliable ways; also refers to the organized
body of knowledge that results from scientific study.
farahsouth.cgu.edu/dictionary/
systematically acquired knowledge that is verifiable.
oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth370/gloss.html
Then there's this:
Science no longer seeks to explain phenomena and arrive at any kind
of reality; rather, it now seeks to classify phenomena according to
preconceived models. This, however, is what we would call "art"
according to our traditional categories.
www.equivalence.com/labor/lab_vf_glo_e.shtml
I think that last one sums it up for me pretty well.
Bob
