Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ISM780B.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!decvax!cca!ISM780B!jim
From: jim@ISM780B.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scientific advance
Message-ID: <27500136@ISM780B.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 28-Sep-85 17:33:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ISM780B.27500136
Posted: Sat Sep 28 17:33:00 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Oct-85 06:00:12 EDT
References: <249@umich.UUCP>
Lines: 14
Nf-ID: #R:umich:-24900:ISM780B:27500136:000:539
Nf-From: ISM780B!jim    Sep 28 17:33:00 1985


>In article <27500124@ISM780B.UUCP> jim@ISM780B.UUCP writes:
>>...  Scientific discovery and advance is nearly
>>monotonic; no such claim can be made for any religion.
>
>I'm the first to defend the rationality of science, but this claim is
>overly grandiose.  Science doesn't advance monotonically; T.S. Kuhn
>showed otherwise.

I said "nearly".  Like Rich, I am not impressed by this form of argument.
Since I am not familiar with Kuhn, please summarize Kuhn's arguments,
so we can all judge them for ourselves.

-- Jim Balter (ima!jim)


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com