We can mean different things - an institution, a focus of study, a method etc. Just need to clarify which sense we're using it in.
Yes, if we define science as addressing any argument which can be right or wrong but I feel this misses the essence.
-
-
I say 'like Monica of Hippo coz A.B,C!' Someone else says 'But also dissimilar coz X,. More similarity with English saints coz Y, Z.'
-
And we discuss this & agree or disagree & the exploration is the point & anyone trying to add up similarities & differences misses it.
-
The aim is simply different. Different ways of looking at things. Coming from different angles. This is what is interesting.
-
PoMo goes too far by insisting that reality is constructed by these different angles & perceptions & that there is no truth.
-
I'd say there is one &science is the method for getting at it. Humanities more for exploring perceptions which are interesting in themselves
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But without falsification also not constructive.
-
That's fine too. Its for the pure interest of seeing how differently people perceive things and the connections they make.
-
We can tell ppl they shouldn't make these connections & that they don't work but ultimately what's interesting is that they do & why they do
-
Sure, but you can only understand that if you formulate the best hyp. It is the growth of knowl. that is interest. Not 1 part of the process
-
I don't think you can tell people what they should find interesting. It won't change what they actually do find interesting.
-
Its way more important whether people are right or wrong to think what they do but for me the interest is in understanding how they think.
-
This is why I focus on how women thought about religion, the connections they made & use they made of it even tho God seems not to exist
-
Yes, but you still want to know if what you are thinking about that topic resembles anything real. So, you need to test-reject-accept hypo.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
What you are talking about is discussion about the validity of competing hypotheses. That is a part of the scientific process.
-
They don't have to compete. It actually is absolutely fine to see things differently.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Apart from method (qualitative vs quantitative), what 'essence' are you talking about? In the end its all about growth of knowledge.
-
I have now elaborated.
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.