pico wrote:
> Phil Roberts, Jr. wrote:
> > D H wrote:
> >> Malrassic Park
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:51:58 -0700, Immortalist
> >>> <reanimater_2000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>> On Aug 11, 6:41 am, Michael Gordge <mikegor...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Quoting Dopey Kant
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "But we don't synthesize reality, make it up, it exists
independently
> >>>>> of us, and because reality exists independently of all possible
> >>>>> experience it remains permanently hidden."
>
> A citation would be helpful. Did Kant really say "remains permanently
> hidden"? It may not matter. Moving on...
>
> > "Physical concepts are the free creations of the human mind and
> > are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external
> > world."--A. Einstein in The Evolution of Physics with L. Infeld,
> > 1938.
>
> Concept is a difficult term in the philosophical domain. Generally,
> let's agree that a Concept is something that stands in place of
> something else, usually considered physical reality.
>
> I'd say Kant and Einstein were on to something.
Logical empiricism was the vogue back in 1938, which deemed
metaphysics to be meaningless (thus Einstein's personal nod to non-
realism at the time, which he is sometimes accused of straying from
later). It is retrospectively held that science engages in
methodological naturalism rather than metaphysical naturalism, so that
science (if not always PoS) at least recognizes some ontological
arguments (like physicalism) as being "useful" if not proveable. But
"methodological naturalism" was only coined in 1983 (by a philosopher
and evolutionary theist), thus how it winds-up being a retrospective
evaluation that science is claimed to have not been engaging in
ontological dogma in the past.
|
