Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mcvax!botter!klipper!biep From: biep@klipper.UUCP Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Subject: {Science} through {Philosophy} =/= 0 Message-ID: <859@klipper.cs.vu.nl> Date: Tue, 18-Aug-87 05:43:58 EDT Article-I.D.: klipper.859 Posted: Tue Aug 18 05:43:58 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 20-Aug-87 01:23:34 EDT Reply-To: biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) Distribution: world Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 35 I got this in the mail (warning: you are about to jump in the middle of a discussion!), and thought it was worth being put here. Dennis agrees to me putting it on the net, but I am not sure he wants to get involved in the discussion (see his remarks at the end). If you follow up to this, please attribute correctly! From: Dennis Hamilton To: biep@cs.vu.nl Subject: Re: What is a methodology In mail to Biep (biep@cs.vu.nl), Dennis Hamilton (deh0654@sjfc) writes: ~Now, what's the other topic. Oh, is the intersection of ph. and sc. non-empty. ~I didn't realize I had effectively said that. I think I want to leave the ~claim in, although it seemed wrong at first, when put so directly. The more ~I think about it, the more I want to stick with it. The only reading I have ~that could be used to support the claim is both about epistomology and ~ontology, going back to Russell ("Analysis of Matter") which is about how do ~we know what we know about the physical world, and Whitehead, I think, who ~was concerned about being able to measure things. (What makes a yardstick ~work, or a meter stick, for that matter.) I am paraphrasing badly. ~ ~My first reaction is that philosophy and science have perspectives on the ~same subjects, rather than have overlapping content. Now I think I'd be happy ~to propose that both are true. You can blame it on me just so long as I'm ~not expected to marshall a strenuous defense of the idea. (By the way, ~I have been supposing that Empiricism, Pragmatism, and Utilitarianism are ~philosophical perspectives, and that without some or all of them, there ~isn't any Scientific perspective. But I've never looked real hard at what ~it might mean to say that. I don't appreciate much of the subtleties that ~I believe are actually attached to those capitalized terms.) ~ orcmid {uucp: ... !rochester!sjfc!deh0654 -- Biep. (biep@cs.vu.nl via mcvax) Protect endangered species: Forbid line-eater hunting!