[lbo-talk] Neo-Lamarckianism???? Come on!

[Miles Jackson]

Charles Brown wrote:
> Chris Doss 
>
> I have never met a scientist, in person or in print,
> who asserted that everything is knowable. Science
> itself does not hold anything. Science is a technique.
>
> ^^^^
> CB: Ok.  Scientific technique always proceeds as if what it's
> investigating can be understood. And no one can tell everybody that
> there are questions for which the scientific technique cannot be used.
> No one can foreclose use of the scientific technique on any question. No
> one can declare for others  that some question is an insoluble mystery.
>
> Lets call it scientific philosophy. Scientific philosophy holds that
> there is no question for which scientific inquiry cannot be applied, no
> question for which it can be declared that it cannot be understood
> through scientific technique.
>
>   
I don't know of any scientists who make this grandiose claim.   There 
are many forms of knowledge that have nothing to do with science (e.g., 
analysis of art and literature).  I'm a big fan of the scientific 
method, but it's important to recognize that there are many domains of 
human knowledge where the scientific method is completely irrelevant.

Miles