Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fester Chugabrew; Elsie
If the validity of every hypothesis were dependent solely upon proven (or even provable!) facts, there would be no such thing as a hypothesis.

Fester, here's your science assignment for the day: Write down, think about, or tell me what you think a hypothesis is.

Then go find the scientific definition of a hypothesis, and what it's used for.

Then, tell me how the 2 definitions differ.

609 posted on 03/18/2004 2:16:59 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | View Replies ]


To: Amelia; Elsie; js1138
Then go find the scientific definition of a hypothesis . . .

This is a fine idea, but I honestly would like your help, and please do not think I am asking this just to be lazy. Please tell me THE scientific definition of a hypothesis and how you arrived at the conclusion that this definition alone is the standard to be applied to all intelligent observers of the universe. If I try to find it "out there," I will find more than one definition.

Tell you what. I will make up a hypothesis of my own, and then you can tell me if it fits within the scientific definition of a hypothesis. Here goes:

The scientific definition of a hypothesis is subject to variable expression because humans differ in their comprehension of reality and how it applies to criticial thinking.

Doubtless you will insist that the CONCEPT or DEFINITION of hypothesis does not exist in such a manner as to be verifiable by science. Well, doesn't that leave us in a fine mess. If it cannot be quantified, and thus not verified, by science, what business do we have in believing a hypothesis has any basis whatsoever in reality?

612 posted on 03/18/2004 2:37:17 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 609 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson