Anthropic Principle -- in reply to the preceding post. The strong form offends my sensibilities as it seems like new-age metaphysical tosh.
Why Does The Universe Exist?
- Thread starter Dryson
- Start date
I agree. The weak is obvious, the strong is simply baseless and equivalent to a religion.
In some ways - all philosophical thinking is somewhat religious in nature... It's hard to get away from that...
I disagree. It's like saying: "In some ways, science is an elaborate way of expressing an opinion". There are people who are actually convinced of that!!!
Is the scientific method itself falsifiable?
Boom, head explodes...
Boom, head explodes...
There are Gödel's incompleteness theorems...
However, they don't apply to the scientific method per se. They still give you an insight into the way such a question could be treated.
I don't know. Maybe you could code the method using propositional logic and feed it to itself.
The thing is the scientific method is the difference between science and any other mode of thinking. To paraphrase a statement about democracy, I'd say that the scientific method is the worst thought system with the exception of all others.
In practical terms, no other system started from nothing (basically our hands and our five senses) to get to things like computers, space rockets, radio telescopes...
In practical terms, no other system started from nothing (basically our hands and our five senses) to get to things like computers, space rockets, radio telescopes...
Similar threads
