Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cscs!csmith
From: csmith@cscs.UUCP (Craig E. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Emergent Properties
Keywords: chaos, science, prediction
Message-ID: <1990Oct31.102704.18335@cscs.UUCP>
Date: 31 Oct 90 10:27:04 GMT
References: <1990Oct12.214636.7945@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <30@tdatirv.UUCP> <1990Oct19.201604.7280@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <3369@aipna.ed.ac.uk> <1990Oct26.214354.11063@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <3383@aipna.ed.ac.uk> <1990Oct31.001104.22908@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Organization: CS Computer Systems, Hudson, MA, USA
Lines: 22

In <1990Oct31.001104.22908@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> fostel@eos.ncsu.edu (Gary Fostel) writes:


>In previous notes, I said lot of things, mainly supporting the value of a
>traditional view of what is or is not "science".  Malcolm, at Edinburgh,
>said many things defending the relatively looser (flexible?) view of
>what is or is not science.  

In the general sense of the word, a "science" is simply any subject
which can be systematically studied in a logical manner, and the
related body of knowledge generated by that study. In most cases,
the decision of whether or not to call a particular study a science
is primarily a political consideration, and is largely based on whether 
one accepts that the field can be systematically, and logically 
investigated.


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If you want a picture of the future,  | Internet:     csmith@cscs.UUCP 
  imagine a boot stomping on a human    | UUCP:     ... uunet!cscs!csmith 
  face - forever.  - George Orwell      |---------------------------------