Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Thanks, Paul

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on December 30, 2001 23:13:33 UTC

Perhaps the only issue that I would have preferred that you comment was on my 'test' for you to create theorems from the undefined terms and axioms that I gave. Therein lies my main emphasis to you and Dick. If mathematics is not really a 'from scratch' enterprise as I suggest, then the question of what separates mathematics from science is a pseudo one. In other words, it is not feasible to derive a mathematical approach (a view similar to Dick's approach) or logical approach (a very similar to Bertrand Russell's symbolic logic approach) that is any more fundamental or less prone to error than science itself. This is where I believe 21st century philosophy is today and the reason that foundationalist approaches have failed to fill the skepticism gap. Pragmatism is now a heavy contender to be called the law of the land (and science in its experimental approach is one of the kings of that hill).

Thanks for the discussion. Happy New Year.

Warm regards, Harv

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins