What are the questions science can't answer?

[MindOverMatter2]

A man cannot serve two masters. You can’t be a scientist and a philosopher.

This is purely ideological and ridiculous.

 

[Moonstruck888]

In no particular order;

Alhazen, died1039, Philosopher (Treatise on Place, Epistimology), Theologian, Scientist, Engineer. Most famous for coming up with this theory: Observation - Statement of problem - Formulation of hypothesis - Testing of hypothesis using experimentation - Analysis of experimental results - Interpretation of data and formulation of conclusion- Publication of findings.

Rhazes, d925, Chemist (Discovered compounds Kerosene and Alcahol), Physician (Differentiated Smallpox and Measles, work on Diseases), Philosopher (Ethics of Medicine, Metaphysics)

Avicenna d1048, Philosopher (Works on Aristotelian Ontology), Chemistry (Discovered Steam Distillation), Poet, Doctor (Father of modern Clinical Trial Methods)

**Alberonius ** d1048, Philosopher (Critique on Aristotelianism), Geology (discovered continental drift), Mathematics (Calcluted rate at which earths rotation accelerates), Scientist (Invented Hydrodynamics)

Cicero d46bc, Philosopher (Latinised Greek Philosophy), Lawyer, Member of Consul, Orator.

Leon Battista Alberti d1472, Philosopher (Aesthetics), Poet, Architect, Painter, Linguist.

Leonardo da Vinci d1519, Philosopher (Humanism), Painter, Inventor, Botanist.

Wolfgang von Goethe d1832, Philosopher (Natural Philosophy), Writer (Faust), Poet, Theologian.

Robert Hooke d1703, Philosopher (Natural Philosophy), Scientist (Microscopy, Gravity), Architect.

Galileo Galilei d1642, Scientist (Astronomy, Kinematics), Philosophy (Philosophy of Philoponus)

René Descartes d1650, Philosopher (Cartesianism, Foundationalism), Mathematican (Tangent line problem), Scientist (Analytic geometry).

Isaac Newton d1726, Bible Scholar, Philosopher (Rationalism), Scientist (Theory of Gravity, Optics)

I take it you believe NONE of these made any contributions to either Science of Philosophy, as they could not serve two masters?

NB: I included famous examples of those who serve other masters; such as the arts (Goethe) as an example to how one can be skilled in philosophy AND numerous other areas.

Your examples are interesting. Notice that none of them actually mixed science with philosophy working on the same problems in the same sense?

There’s a good reason for that.

 

[Moonstruck888]

This is purely ideological and ridiculous.

You cannot approach a scientific problem with a philosopher’s hat on. End of story.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

You cannot approach a scientific problem with a philosopher’s hat on. End of story.

So how is it that scientists form intelligible hypothesis (hypothetical logical inferences) or interpret data? If they don’t have a philosophy about how they do that before they perform experiments, then I suppose it really is the end of the story for science.

You really are clueless about you number one favourite word (science).

 

[grannymh]

You cannot approach a scientific problem with a philosopher’s hat on. End of story.

I’m a lady and will wear any dang hat I please.

As to the question science can’t answer completely — What is the purpose of the true, real, fully complete human nature? One like mine?

 

[Moonstruck888]

I’m a lady and will wear any dang hat I please.

You have every right to be wrong, of course.

As to the question science can’t answer completely — What is the purpose of the true, real, fully complete human nature? One like mine?

That would be a matter of opinion, and I doubt you’d like mine.

 

[Moonstruck888]

So how is it that scientists form intelligible hypothesis (hypothetical logical inferences) or interpret data? If they don’t have a philosophy about how they do that before they perform experiments, then I suppose it really is the end of the story for science.

You really are clueless about you number one favourite word (science).

Newsflash. Hardly any scientists who have ever lived have had philosophy PHD’s.

Science is results based.

 

[davidv]

Newsflash. Hardly any scientists who have ever lived have had philosophy PHD’s.

Science is results based.

Why is a phd needed to use philosply? Do you need a math phd to balance your checkbook?

Science is based in philosophy. Theories of the physical sciences are results based.

 

[grannymh]

That would be a matter of opinion, and I doubt you’d like mine.

Well, to be honest, I wasn’t looking for your opinion, sorry about that. On the other hand if you are speaking for science, I still would like something more than a personal opinion…

Here’s the question which science can’t completely answer: “What is the purpose of the true, real, fully complete human nature? One like mine?”

 

[Moonstruck888]

Well, to be honest, I wasn’t looking for your opinion, sorry about that. On the other hand if you are speaking for science, I still would like something more than a personal opinion…

Here’s the question which science can’t completely answer: “What is the purpose of the true, real, fully complete human nature? One like mine?”

I suggest you take that question to someone who doesn’t look on you with total disdain and contempt for being absurd enough to ask it.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Newsflash. Hardly any scientists who have ever lived have had philosophy PHD’s.

Science is results based.

This is not a refutation of my point, even if its true that many scientists didn’t take philosophy. What I am saying is a fact of science. What you are saying is just as irrelevant as it is a deceptive attempt to avoid facing the reality of my argument.

 

[Moonstruck888]

This is not a refutation of my point, even if its true that many scientists didn’t take philosophy. What I am saying is a fact of science. What you are saying is just as irrelevant as it is a deceptive attempt to avoid facing the reality of my argument.

There is no arguement. If you want your car fixed, you don’t take it to a chiropodist or a flower arranger do you?

And if you want an answer to a philosophical question, you don’t take it to a scientist,

You should know this.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

There is no arguement. If you want your car fixed, you don’t take it to a chiropodist or a flower arranger do you?

And if you want an answer to a philosophical question, you don’t take it to a scientist,

You should know this.

This is more rubbish than I care bare. This is a caricature and a straw-man of my argument.

 

[Moonstruck888]

This is more rubbish than I care bare. This is a caricature and a straw-man of my argument.

Your argument is stupid. Science is science, philosophy is philososphy. You don’t ask a Botanist about the Standard Model do you? You don’t ask an Organic Chemist to fly an F22 combat mission do you? Why would you ask a scientist to give you a commentry on metaphysics?

Science and Philsophy are two totally seperate disciplines. Trying to make me answer metaphysical questions to justify being a scientist is total hypocrisy.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Your argument is stupid. Science is science, philosophy is philososphy. You don’t ask a Botanist about the Standard Model do you? You don’t ask an Organic Chemist to fly an F22 combat mission do you? Why would you ask a scientist to give you a commentry on metaphysics?

Science and Philsophy are two totally seperate disciplines.

You still haven’t refuted my argument. Calling it stupid is not an argument. Making a straw-man of my argument is not an argument. Science has a philosophy of interpenetration. It makes inductive inferences in its hypothesis. Otherwise the scientists could not possibly make intelligible sense of what he or she is measuring. Like it or not, science is founded upon and rooted in a particular philosophical world-view.

 

[Moonstruck888]

You still haven’t refuted my argument. Calling it stupid is not an argument. Making a straw-man of my argument is not an argument. Science has a philosophy of interpenetration. It makes inductive inferences in its hypothesis. Otherwise the scientists could not possibly make intelligible sense of what he or she is measuring. Like it or not, science is founded upon and rooted in a particular philosophical world-view.

I’m not a philospher, as I have stated repeatedly.

I neither know nor care whether your argument can be justified from the point of view of a philoshopher.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

I’m not a philospher, as I have stated repeatedly.

I neither know nor care whether your argument can be justified from the point of view of a philoshopher.

If you are not interested in truth, and if you are not here to respect and understand other peoples ideas or world-views, then why are you here? What is your problem? Are you just trolling? I am surprised that you haven’t yet been banned.

 

[JohnDamian]

I’m not a philospher, as I have stated repeatedly.

I neither know nor care whether your argument can be justified from the point of view of a philoshopher.

Science relies upon philosophy in the same way as an aeroplane pilot relies upon an engineer to design/build the plane.

Science cannot exist without philosophy. It presupposes Philosophy; Logic; as well as many other areas such as Mathematics (which is built upon logic); inferences; which are too built upon logic - as well as hypothesis and methods of analysis; which surprise surprise also rely upon Logic – not some haphazard guesswork; the Scientists collect information and apply logical analysis to this information to infer a theory.

This would not be possible without philosophy.

If you don’t understand philosophy say so. If you merely reject it bullheadedly; then I would not be overstepping my politeness to ask why you post on a philosophy board?

 

[grannymh]

I suggest you take that question to someone who doesn’t look on you with total disdain and contempt for being absurd enough to ask it.

Seriously, my dear friend, you have provided the “third ingredient” for a research project late this year. Thank you. It is a blessing to have a public message board.

May good thoughts come your way,
granny

John 3: 16-17

 

[Moonstruck888]

Seriously, my dear friend, you have provided the “third ingredient” for a research project late this year. Thank you. It is a blessing to have a public message board.

May good thoughts come your way,
granny

John 3: 16-17

Sadly, the feeling is not mutual. When my atheism and your vanity has us meet with each other in hell, it shall be the worse for you.