wazua Mon, Jul 21, 2025
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

Whore science?
Options
Previous Topic · Next Topic
tycho
#1 Posted : Monday, June 03, 2019 10:41:36 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
How valid is the argument that if something hasn't been scientifically proven then it is wrong or is a lie?

Especially when we realize that science is a model that helps us to explain present events and predict future ones... If this definition is true then no model is comprehensive enough to claim absolute truth.

Therefore justification of action or things can't rely on science.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Wakanyugi
#2 Posted : Monday, June 03, 2019 11:25:55 AM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/3/2007
Posts: 1,635
tycho wrote:
How valid is the argument that if something hasn't been scientifically proven then it is wrong or is a lie?

Especially when we realize that science is a model that helps us to explain present events and predict future ones... If this definition is true then no model is comprehensive enough to claim absolute truth.

Therefore justification of action or things can't rely on science.


This argument is rarely made by true scientists. It can not be true.

In fact I thinking the better thesis is "everything you believe today is ultimately false"
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
tycho
#3 Posted : Monday, June 03, 2019 12:43:29 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Wakanyugi wrote:
tycho wrote:
How valid is the argument that if something hasn't been scientifically proven then it is wrong or is a lie?

Especially when we realize that science is a model that helps us to explain present events and predict future ones... If this definition is true then no model is comprehensive enough to claim absolute truth.

Therefore justification of action or things can't rely on science.


This argument is rarely made by true scientists. It can not be true.

In fact I thinking the better thesis is "everything you believe today is ultimately false"


If this is the case, how can we have constructive dialogue on issues, say like climate change? Or even the economy, in a global context?
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Wazua Club SK Theme
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
Copyright © 2025 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.