> okay, so bring on paul to spank me for daring (gasp!) to criticize positivism.
Egad! How many times do I have to say it? I am NOT a positivist. I am a pragmatist. I think positivism is a load of crap. Why can't any of you read? (A bad case of PoMo-itis, perhpas?)
Kelly also wrote:
> second, what if science itself is a form of ideology?
> i mean, hello?, there are plenty of scientifically proven
> 'theories' out there that work as ideologies.
You're committing so many fallcies here, I can't keep them all straight.
Take away the single quotes, change "plenty" to "all" and you'd STILL be comitting the fallacy of composition.
> and, when you get right down to it, isn't the mathematical
> formulae used to scientifically thest the truth of a theory
> ulitimately nothing more than a language?
No. Mathematics is most definitely NOT a language, though of course it can be spoken of metaphorically as one -- as can music, dance, painting, what-have-you. Our mathematical capacity derives from different parts of the brain, evolved for different purposes. Mathematics per se (as opposed to representations of it) cannot express humor. There are no ironic equations. It's nothing at all like a real natural language.
Nor are mathematical formulae used to scientifically test the truth of a theory. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE is used to scientifically test the truth of a theory. Mathermatics can certainly help in this process, but no more than measuring and recording instruments help.
"I saw my girl getting sloppy." -- DEVO
-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at gte.net
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"