[grey_whiskers]

Try reading up on the history of classical thought -- note that for the longest time (until technology began to catch up, and the transition in thought from scholasticism to empiricism was mated with beginning to ask for mechanism rather than "motivation"), the "natural sciences" were thought of as sickly weak sisters to the other disciplines.

The shoe definitely is on the other foot now.

Cheers!

[Sherman Logan]

for the longest time ... the "natural sciences" were thought of as sickly weak sisters to the other disciplines.

I am perfectly well aware of this, thank you.

That doesn't mean those who believed this were right. Once the scientific method was developed, it was in fact quickly shown that they were wrong.

It should be pointed out that metaphysics and the other purely speculative disciplines reached wildly diverse results, not only between different civilizations such as the Middle East, Europe, India and China, but within those civilizations. So which of these results are we to accept as "the truth" and on what basis can we base that conclusion?

Science, otoh, properly done will reach exactly the same conclusions whether the experiment is performed in Palo Alto or Peking.