From: Alexanian, Moorad (alexanian@uncw.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 22 2003 - 22:20:15 EDT
Dear Dave,
Humans, as detectors of physical reality, can take data but all such data can be taken, in principle, by purely physical devices. Eyes detect the visual electromagnetic spectrum, skin can detect infrared radiation, ears can detect sound waves, etc. In such instances, a human is using its physical body to interact and detect physical phenomena. Of course, humans are more than that since the can “detect” the spiritual aspect of reality----not to mention self and rationality. Objective data requires interpretation in order to infer laws of nature and so there can be erroneous interpretation as your examples indicate. But none of that indicates any inadequacy in my definition of the subject matter of science.
Moorad
-----Original Message-----
From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
Sent: Tue 4/22/2003 4:32 PM
To: Alexanian, Moorad
Cc: michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk; hvantill@chartermi.net; gmurphy@raex.com; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: ID science (subtopic 2)
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 09:25:19 -0400 "Alexanian, Moorad"
<alexanian@uncw.edu> writes:
> Dave,
>
> Read my post carefully. I am indicating what is the subject matter
> of
> science---data that can, in principle, be collected by purely
> physical
> devices---not quite yet what science is. One must have a clear
> understanding of what science is and what it is not. Science
> includes,
> in addition, inferences from the data, which we must be careful not
> to
> contaminate with personal subjectivity that adulterates science.
> For
> instance, a scientist does not have to include as data the dreams
> he/she
> has. Is that clear? Science deals with the physical and that is what
> I
> am trying to get at. We want data that is an objective
> representation of
> physical reality.
>
> Moorad
>
>
If I take you seriously, no astronomer could do science until photography
was used to record the images--unless a pen, pencil or chalk is a
mechanical recording device. Eyeballing a spectrum in the absence of a
recording device cannot be science. Objectivity does not inhere in the
apparatus, as the N-ray episode with its many published reports should
demonstrate. Recall also the cold fusion episode. Somebody's instruments
were measuring something that no one else could duplicate But the
original observations were as objective as instruments could provide.
There's a broader basis to science than recording instruments.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 22 2003 - 22:21:11 EDT