Replies

From a purely conceptual standpoint science does not have limits. In practice, however, it is indeed limited. All that is necessary for science to take place is a.) a human observer, and b.) phenomena to observe.

Obviously this is too wide a definition for you. It's got to be guys in lab coats handing down formal declarations of sacred truth. Hahahaha! You're the mystic, not me.

"From a purely conceptual standpoint science does not have limits. In practice, however, it is indeed limited."

Science is a logical tool that is ONLY useful in practice. Therefore, it IS always limited in scope.

"All that is necessary for science to take place is a.) a human observer, and b.) phenomena to observe."

No, this is false. You are describing the preconditions for perception, not science. Perception is not science. Observation is not science. My God!, you are not even CLOSE to being right. Observation, perception, is a STARTING point of science; science is much more than that though. It's testing, it's organizing these observations into theories; theories that can be falsified and that can make testable predictions.

"Obviously this is too wide a definition for you."

No, it just isn't science.

"It's got to be guys in lab coats handing down formal declarations of sacred truth. Hahahaha! You're the mystic, not me."

You have now redefined mystic as to be objective and science as subjective. Do you get paid for every word you redefine?