OK? So what? Where is this going? If you mean that sometimes people can find information and data in myths, I agree and have never claimed otherwise. This is not the point of the disagreement.
I don't know what 'other kinds of evidence than just scientific' means. Science is a methodology based on evidence. Other fields like history also rely on evidence but may not be considered science. If your philosophy relies on evidence, good. We have no disagreement.
-
-
If one says that scientific evidence is the only kind of evidence, then philosophy is just a part of science. But if we say that philosophy works with forms of evidence not limited to scientific evidence, then the use of evidence is not itself sufficient to distinguish science.
-
I'm still not sure you're saying anything. Please get to the point of explaining what you mean in clear terms with examples rather than vague abstractions or let me get back to work.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.