Ahem. Deny it all you want, but the world is round, not flat. If you need a primer on exactly what philosophical assumptions do indeed underlie 'science' and its 'capacity', I have a lot of links to offer you. First in the list ... no, wait a sec...
"Google and the Internet make it duck soup.." is how it was put by a poster once...
Ahem. Deny it all you want, but the world is round,
It's not. It's a highly irregularly surfaced, unbalanced oblate spheroid.
not flat. If you need a primer on exactly what philosophical assumptions do indeed underlie 'science' and its 'capacity', I have a lot of links to offer you. First in the list ... no, wait a sec...
Don't bother, if you want to make this point, I'd like references from the vast number of scientists who think science rules out the existence of metaphysical explanations of things--which is what philosophical naturalism, not science, assumes.
Sorry, I didn't realize that was a challenge. I'm sure you can find and quote to me plenty of philosophical blovation about how philosophy underpins every worthwhile notion everyone ever had. Particularly from academic philosophers who get paid by the state to sit around and think up a philosophical storm. Science's pressing need for philosophy, however, stands on about a par with its pressing need in auto mechanics or fish farming or writing traffic tickets.