Methodological Naturalism

Hi, Stephen! Detectable does not mean "directly apparent to one or more of the five senses." Everything we think we know in science is detectable in some way, which often means we have to use our tools and instruments to make apparent to our senses something that normally isn't. Of course, I don't have to explain this to such a great scientist as yourself.--Percy

I wouldn't think the words themselves have any special meanings within the context of MN. Like many words, they have multiple definitions that are usually clear in context. It wouldn't be correct to assume they're synonyms, though certainly in some contexts they could be. Detecting some event might verify or falsify an hypothesis, or it might just be one step along the way.My only point was that detectable does not have to mean "directly apparent to the five senses", something that should have been obvious to you anyway. I think MrHambre was using the term "verifiable" in the sense of replication. When he says that a phenomena is detectable and verifiable, he means the phenomena has been observed, and that the observations have been verified by others, ie, replicated.--Percy

Actually, an ad hominem is when you abandon rational argument to instead make appeals to prejudice. Whether or not your insults are deserved, they *are* ad hominem.Your posts are becoming more and more Salty-esque, by which I mean you are directing more and more of your attention toward the perceived deficiencies in your opponents' character instead of to their positions and arguments. Might I suggest that you turn aside from this course and instead address some of the issues that have been raised in the H-D isn't what it used to be according to Stephen ben Yeshua thread, or The best scientific method thread, or the History's Greatest Holocaust Via Atheistic Ideology thread, or the designing a convincing prayer experiment thread.--Percy[This message has been edited by Percy, 01-29-2004]