Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!mcnc!unc!gallmeis
From: gallmeis@unc.UUCP (Bill Gallmeister)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Impossibilities (...and Recommended Reading)
Message-ID: <442@unc.unc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 29-Sep-86 19:47:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.442
Posted: Mon Sep 29 19:47:38 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 2-Oct-86 20:18:56 EDT
References: <3279@caip.RUTGERS.EDU> <15634@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <346@unc.unc.UUCP> <15763@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: gallmeis@unc.UUCP (Bill Gallmeister)
Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 30
Xref: linus net.sf-lovers:15680 talk.philosophy.misc:113

In article <15763@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> desj@brahms.UUCP (David desJardins) writes:
>   There is a name for the opposite belief -- that the behavior of the
>universe can be understood.  It is called 'science.'  Understandably,
>therefore, those of us who consider ourselves 'scientists' don't go
>along with your opinion as expressed above.

Is it the opposite of science to say that there are things science cannot
find out?  I would hate to think I were anti-science -- I'd sure feel
stupid! I did not mean to say that science is a crock -- it works,
doesn't it?

I think it is obvious that the scientific method and the empirical quest
for knowledge have been, ah, successful, to understate things considerably.
At the same time, I think it is obvious that there are things science (as
we know it) can never discover, because this sort of knowledge is just not
susceptible to the empirical method of attack.

In short, I think that "Scientific Knowledge" is a proper subset of
"Knowledge".  I think it is a little pompous to say that you can learn
anything by the scientific method, and that, once science uncovers
something, it will never be disproven.

>   I can't help wondering how you can be so sure of yourself, in criti-
>cizing others for being too sure of themselves.

I'm not.  The emphatic wording of my posting was meant to stimulate some
interesting conversation.  And thank you, it succeeded.

Yours in wondering as well,
	Bill O. Gallmeister	...!mcnc!unc!gallmeis