768
edits
Changes
→Philosophy of Science: Sir Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn: Response to Angellight 888's suggestion
Cheers,
[[User:Angellight 888|Angellight 888]] 21:13, June 14, 2010 (UTC)
:This OrthodoxWiki article is about whether the dominant scientific theory of biological origins is compatible with Orthodox faith.
:Kuhn and Popper are not, properly, "scientific philosophers," but "philosophers of science": they philosophize about "philosophy of science," a field which determines the boundaries and subject matter of science. Kuhn and Popper are certainly vitally important to understanding the current state of the field of philosophy of science, but neither are definitive voices (''i.e.'', the "last word") on the subject. Popper's statement would need to be understood within the fullness of his argument, whatever it is. Is it a conclusion? A premise in a larger argument? Both? Whatever its context, it cannot stand on its own simply on the basis of his authority, because it begs the question. It states as a declaration (assumes as solved) the very thing under consideration.
:You are absolutely correct: Understanding their thought is vitally important to understanding whether the current state of evolutionary theory counts as science (what Wolshchak has facetiously called "post-post-neo-Darwinism," meaning the label "Darwinism" ''per se'' is no longer applicable).
:However, this OrthodoxWiki article is about whether the dominant scientific theory of biological origins is compatible with Orthodox faith; it is not about the scientific validity of the dominant scientific theory. The latter should be argued in another forum, one on the subject of "boundary issues" in philosophy of science. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 14:33, September 30, 2010 (UTC)