Steve,
If your concern is with _faith_, don't all of us place our faith in
Science? If we didn't, we'd be labelled a _creationist_.
Gerry
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Dobson wrote:
> Gerry,
>
> I suppose so, perhaps religion could be deemed scientific if it did
> not
> rely on faith to change the views of others?
>
> Steve
>
> -----
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Steve Dobson Tel: +44 01904
> 433953
> Experimental Officer Fax: +44 01904
> 433902
> Department of Archaeology Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> The King's Manor
> University of York
> York, YO1 7EP, UK
> -----------------
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> On Wed, 10 Nov 1999, Gerry Reinhart-Waller wrote:
>
> > Steve, you mention that science is an attempt to prove a personal
> > philosophy and change the view of others. Isn't this called
> RELIGION?
> > Just curious,
> > Gerry
> >
> > Steve Dobson wrote:
> >
> > > I feel that art is an attempt to communicate personal philosophy -
> the
> > >
> > > emphasis is not persuasion. Science, on the other hand, is done
> in an
> > >
> > > attempt to prove this philosophy and to change the views of
> reality of
> > >
> > > others. Art may achieve this but it is not the main objective.
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > > -----
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Steve Dobson Tel: +44 01904
> > > 433953
> > > Experimental Officer Fax: +44 01904
> > > 433902
> > > Department of Archaeology Email:
> [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > > The King's Manor
> > > University of York
> > > York, YO1 7EP, UK
> > > -----------------
> > > -----------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Gerry Reinhart-Waller wrote:
> > >
> > > > Juan, how do you seperate art from science?
> > > > Gerry
> > > >
> > > > Juan A. Barcelo wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I also consider Mike's conception of Truth. If we begin with
> the
> > > > > classical ide. "truth is what the world is", Then, there is
> not a
> > > noun
> > > > >
> > > > > called "truth", but an adjective called "true" (or not true").
>
> > > That
> > > > > is,
> > > > > Truth is not a goal in itself but a characteristic of
> scientific
> > > > > propositions.Truth is what the world is, but our knowledge of
> the
> > > > > world
> > > > > is always indirect: we cannot "see" all causes and processes.
> > > > > Therefore,
> > > > > any idea of "true" should be probabilistic or fuzzy, according
> to
> > > our
> > > > > means of knowing the world.
> > > > >
> > > > > But in these circunstances, "truth" has nothing to do with
> art. Is
> > > a
> > > > > good and old science. Not a reification of Science, but the
> way we
> > >
> > > > > learn, the way we modify our knowledge when we obtain new
> > > information,
> > > > >
> > > > > and the "truth-content" (probabilistic fit with what we know
> of
> > > the
> > > > > world) increases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Juan A. Barcelo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|