Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caesar.cs.montana.edu!milton!charlie
From: charlie@milton.acs.washington.edu (Charles Geyer)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: The Topic that wouldn't go away (re: sci vs. talk)
Message-ID: <1726@milton.acs.washington.edu>
Date: 4 Feb 90 03:36:01 GMT
References: <3284@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <3285@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <9442@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <7346@tank.uchicago.edu> <1990Feb1.005817.1786@everexn.uucp>
Reply-To: charlie@stat.washington.edu (Charlie Geyer)
Organization: UW Statistics, Seattle
Lines: 41
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:


In article <1990Feb1.005817.1786@everexn.uucp> karen@everexn.uucp
(Karen Valentino) writes on the notion that philosophy is a science:

> Maybe some definitions are in order.  From Webster's:
>
> science: 1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from
> ignorance or misunderstanding.  2: a: a department of systematized
> knowledge as an object of study. b: something that may be learned
> like systematized knowledge. c: one of the natural sciences.  3: a:
> knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws
> esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method.  b: such 
> knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural
> science.  4: a system or method reconciling practical ends with
> scientific laws.  
>
> Wow!  Lots of things are science!  In it's definitions of science,
> Webster's mentions theology as science, sport as science, and culinary 
> science!  Cooking!!  Do I want these things under sci.?  No.  Are they 
> sciences?  Yes.  And yes, indeed, astrology is a science.  

What you have to understand about this is that some dictionaries take a
very permissive view of definitions.  If some native speaker would use the
word "science" in that sense, then that is one definition.  The writers of
the dictionary are not making a value judgement that astrology really is a
science, or that people with any brains whatsoever think so, only that
some native speakers would say so.  That's not much of a standard.

Considering that "science" is such a fad word, everything being called a
"science" by someone, mostly in the spirit of pure craven flackery, it's
no surprise that somewhere out there people are peddling astrological
science, basketweaving science, culinary science, and so forth.  But this
so debases the term "science" as to make it virtually meaningless.

So what?  The question remains: is there anyone who cares enough about the
meaning of words to deserve the name "philosopher" who would call
philosophy a science?

I wouldn't think so.

But don't mind me.  I voted for sci.skeptic.