[King Prout]

Ptolemy, it turns out.

don't sneer too much at philosophy - the ptolmaic model did predict the motions of the planets better than the heliocentric model, UNTIL Kepler realized the orbits are elliptic rather than circular. Bear in mind that Kepler did not observe the elliptic orbits, but derived the concept... philosophically.

some epicurean philosophy bears shocking similarity to modern particle physics. not bad for thoughts derived from deduction based on macroscopic evidence, no?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Bear in mind that Kepler did not observe the elliptic orbits, but derived the concept... philosophically.

Actually he had nearly 30 years of almost nightly observations provided by his teacher, Tycho Brahe.

[jec41]

don't sneer too much at philosophy

Not at all. I'm one of the few squirrels you will meet that has a chemical engineering degree and a degree in philosophy but in the 40 years since much has changed. As late as 1929 all the known chemistry in the world could be published in one text book and was studied for years. By 1980 a large library would be needed. More chemistry was being discovered in a single day than was known the previous
day. My position is that those things that lack empirical evidence are better argued by philosophy and those things for which there is empirical evidence are better explained by science. My biggest complaint is that education has failed in its task to explain and define such things as evidence, empirical evidence, theory, hypotheses, opinion. observation, proof, subjective, assumption, logical deduction and thought. It would appear, that for most, the meaning and definition of each are interchangeable, blurred, and misused to the point that most positions are meaningless. That they themselves have little idea of what they actually stated, or implied. It is particular interesting that science was was reasoned and deducted from philosophy and not the opposite.

[b_sharp]

Just as long as Philosophers don't think themselves to death.