Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!ukc!eagle!rjf
From: rjf@eagle.ukc.ac.uk (Robin Faichney)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Definition of science and of scientific method.
Message-ID: <3240@eagle.ukc.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 31-Jul-87 10:19:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: eagle.3240
Posted: Fri Jul 31 10:19:54 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Aug-87 09:51:08 EDT
References: <6693@allegra.UUCP> <1664@tekcrl.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: rjf@ukc.ac.uk (Robin Faichney)
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
Lines: 45

 as humanists appear to, because they know that components are
>judged more by the roles they play than by the company they keep.  However,
>I fear that as long as the humanities (and this, sad to say, includes most
>of philosophy) cling to their insistence that man be regarded as something
>special, there will continue to be this gulf between the "two cultures;"
>and as the sciences inquire more and more into the nature of mind, this
>gulf can only widen.

"Scientists do not consider this view as demeaning as humanists appear to".
People who work in the humanities are all humanists?
Either of these groups generally views objectivity as demeaning?

"Components are judged more by the roles they play than the company they
keep." What on earth does this mean?

Why spoil a clear and fascinating exposition of the history of
philosophy with an attempt to start a "My discipline's better than your's"
controversy. If the humanities are characterised by their attitude to man,
what would they do if they gave that up? Shouldn't serious people try to
deal with issues which (in principle, not just because we haven't found
the formula yet) require value judgements, as well as matters of fact?
Do you really believe that all subjectivity is wrong, and should be
discarded without a second thought? Can't we use intellect to explore
and understand our feelings from the inside, instead of always trying to
explain them away, from the outside?

What is needed, to narrow the gulf between the two cultures, is people
who appreciate both, for their different aims and achievements. Not a
blind and bland insistence that objectivity (or subjectivity) will save
the universe. Science may be able to provide the food, but only a
humanitarian can argue that we should empathise with the starving, and
send it out there.

Robin         ..!mcvax!ukc!rjf

PS If anyone thinks this inappropriate for this group - sue me.