Understanding Early Science: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Imported from text file |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Science is generally regarded as the epitome of objective truth. A flood of books and articles have been written on science and its glories. Sometimes one has to be aware of what is not said! So many words written and no definition of science! Dictionaries do provide definitions that ?accommodate? all claimants to the name of science ? except the thinkers of the past or the deconstructed future! Confronting false ?science? requires a review of science history and then a revision of some cherished early concepts. If a modern secularist does not blush at the tenants of Greek science, neither will he blush at the ?findings? of relativity, quantum mechanics or astronomy! ... | Science is generally regarded as the epitome of objective truth. A flood of books and articles have been written on science and its glories. Sometimes one has to be aware of what is not said! So many words written and no definition of science! Dictionaries do provide definitions that ?accommodate? all claimants to the name of science ? except the thinkers of the past or the deconstructed future! Confronting false ?science? requires a review of science history and then a revision of some cherished early concepts. If a modern secularist does not blush at the tenants of Greek science, neither will he blush at the ?findings? of relativity, quantum mechanics or astronomy! ... | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | [[Category:Scientific Paper|understanding early science]] | ||
[[Category:Relativity]] | [[Category:Relativity|understanding early science]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:11, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Understanding Early Science |
| Author(s) | Russel C Moe |
| Keywords | {{{keywords}}} |
| Published | 2010 |
| Journal | Foundations of Science |
| Volume | 11 |
| Number | 3 |
| No. of pages | 20 |
Abstract
Science is generally regarded as the epitome of objective truth. A flood of books and articles have been written on science and its glories. Sometimes one has to be aware of what is not said! So many words written and no definition of science! Dictionaries do provide definitions that ?accommodate? all claimants to the name of science ? except the thinkers of the past or the deconstructed future! Confronting false ?science? requires a review of science history and then a revision of some cherished early concepts. If a modern secularist does not blush at the tenants of Greek science, neither will he blush at the ?findings? of relativity, quantum mechanics or astronomy! ...