Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution and Science 'so called'-
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 4332 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 1 of 3 (662024)
05-11-2012 5:01 PM


My concerns are in which use of the word 'science' is applied. This word is confined to the physicals, some of which may be called specially experimental sciences, such as chemistry, and others exact sciences, such as astronomy. But evidently uses it in that wider sense in which it includes biology, metaphysics, and philosophy. Under cover of this wide sweep of thier net, they assume to speak with the special authority of beyond scientific natures upon questions respecting which no such authority exists either in them or in anyone else. It seems to be on the strength of thier expert assumption that they designate as pseudo-science or theory any opinion, or teaching, or belief, different from thier own.
I will illustrate what I mean by an example. Comparative anatomy is one of the branches of the larger science of Biology in which they are experts; and, like all the other branches which grow out of the one great stem, as a subject of physical investigation, it runs up into ideas and conceptions which belong to, or border on, the region of metaphysics. Who gives the authority beyond our sciences?
Now, if not absolutely in this conclusion, all the physical facts leading up to it, Biology is an authority in the strictest sense of the word. Science is an original investigator, and if any other man were to contest thier facts, or even thier interpretation of them, without thier independent observation, Biology and science in general would be entitled to pronounce the opposition opinions to be ‘pseudo-science.'
Ultimately one day maybe scientific conclusion may become itself the basis of a farther investigation, and in this farther investigation science then maybe will have no authority at all. We are all entitled to ask as a question, not of physical science, but of philosophy and interpretations.
This is a question of the very highest order today in which science and biologist is not necessarily experts. That laboratory in which the analyses is made and operated is a laboratory to us all in which we can all work. And if in this higher sphere of investigation other men are able to reach conclusions which General science disputes, it is at least possible that it is thier contention, and not that of his opponent, which best deserves the ‘pseudo' prefix. They ridicule the opposition. Yet it needs no expert to see that thier own theory at best stands exactly on the same level with a term called ‘realistic figment.'
I have dwelt upon this point because men are very apt to be intimidated by authorities in ‘science,' when in reality no sort of authority exists. They want to talk about 'scientific sins' quite in the language and spirit of religion. I know a good many scientific men of the very highest standing who totally dissent from biology and are by no means inclined to accept evolution expositions, even of physical science, when those expositions travel beyond the particular branch in which science is only an observer.
Evolutionist propounds that these old logical difficulties which we attach to all our beliefs, and still more to all our history, are only the relations between mind and matter. That no outside authority exist and it is ours alone.
In conclusion, let me express that science in general do an important service to man. Though past says, most truly, that the case with all new doctrines, and so with evolution, 'the enthusiasm of advocates has sometimes tended to degenerate into fanaticism, and mere speculation has, at times, threatened to shoot beyond its legitimate bounds.' These words indicate vaguely and tenderly, but significantly, a fact which I stated, and will again state with emphasis. There has been not merely a tendency to degeneration into fanaticism, but a pronounced development of it, and a widespread infection from it in the language of science. They accept this though this is a work which has yet to be finished to be considered facts. They can only work with the materials which are supplied by only physical means. The tendency of new doctrines to degenerate into fanaticism is one of the ‘laws’ to be traced in the long history of humans, and all those who help to resist it are among the benefactors of their kind.
Edited by Admin, : Add blank lines between paragraphs and spaces after periods.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 05-11-2012 5:21 PM ScottyDouglas has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 3 (662025)
05-11-2012 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ScottyDouglas
05-11-2012 5:01 PM


Hi Scotty,
I'm going to promote this now. I hope it won't be too much to ask for you to divide a message into paragraphs and place a space or two after the periods at the end of sentences.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ScottyDouglas, posted 05-11-2012 5:01 PM ScottyDouglas has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 3 of 3 (662028)
05-11-2012 5:21 PM


Thread Copied to Is It Science? Forum
Thread copied to the Evolution and Science 'so called'- thread in the Is It Science? forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024