quote:
This is semantics of course, but I think it is important when discussing what should be considered science or not. Of course, ID isn't science, but is an observation science? I remember having a discussion with a fellow student in a History and Philosophy of Science course about whether some Native American's used science. He pointed out that they recognized that some roots helped mitigate physical pain. I said that was merely an observation, and an observation itself is not science. I'm not actually sure how the conversation ended, but no conclusions were made. So I'm trying to see what others think about his subject.
"I ate root X," is an observation.
"I am in less pain," is an observation.
"Eating root X caused my pain to lessen," is a hypothesis.
Eating root X again would be testing the hypothesis.
™ Version 4.2
