One must also not forget that the purpose of science is to describe reality.Originally Posted by RiaX
One must also not forget that the purpose of science is to describe reality.
Can you truely describe 'reality' from what we perceive? our ears cant hear everything our eyes cannot see all forms of light. So we must consider, what reality is to us
Either it is possible to capture some or all of the very essence or nature of reality or it is not.
If it is not then science is just made up stuff, like fairies, useful fairies. We are ontologically and epistemologically screwed if you want to get technical.
If it is possible then we have to at least consider the possibility that some of our attempts to understand reality have succeeded and that we have to some extent grasped some of the very nature or essence of reality. In this case it becomes an epistemological problem and not an ontological problem.
Last edited by Techne; 01-08-2012 at 10:44 PM.
Its not possible with our limited sense of the world. Thats why we develop expensive machines to see and calculate what we cannot so it does fit in the same class as fairies
So your answer is number 2? I.e. we are at least able to capture some of the very essence or nature of reality with our unaided intellect and even more by using our intellect to design gadgets to help us get more sensual data for our intellects to analyse?
You can't trust a meta-ethical moral relativist since such a person can abuse reason to justify any act.
Yes, just like how we cannot see infrared light we developed cameras to show use the presence and interpret the light for us. Though we will never know the "true colour" of infrared as our eyes cannot see it so the camera shows the light in blue green yellow red depending in the intensity
What is true color?
dont know. Depends on the eye thats percieving the information hence why i put it in quotation marks
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks