Replies

"... the aims, methodologies and presuppositions of science cannot be validated by science. One cannot turn to science to justify science any more than one can pull up oneself by his own bootstraps. The validation of science is a philosophical issue, not a scientific one, and any claim to the contrary will be a self-refuting philosophical claim."

Just so, apologist!!! Kudos for posting this!

Reminds me of a fable from Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, whose lead character, Captain Lemuel Gulliver, made a description of the "architect" of Lagado. This description is courtesy of the mathematical physicist and theoretical biologist Hubert P. Yockey:

This architect contrived a new method for building houses by starting at the roof and working down and establishing a foundation at the end of the project. The architect pointed out that among the obvious advantages of this method is that once the roof was in place the workers could toil in the shade of the hot sun and at other times be protected from rain and snow. Thus, inclement weather would not delay the progress of the construction. The Grand Academy of Lagado had approved this proposal by peer review, but the architect had not yet put it into practice at the time of Captain Gulliver's visit.

Don't you just love it??? :^)

Time to break out Gulliver's Travels, one more time....

Thank you so much for writing apologist, and for your many fine posts of recent times.

"... the aims, methodologies and presuppositions of science cannot be validated by science. One cannot turn to science to justify science any more than one can pull up oneself by his own bootstraps. The validation of science is a philosophical issue, not a scientific one, and any claim to the contrary will be a self-refuting philosophical claim."

Yockey has mastered the art a of good story/illustration :^), thanks for sharing.

How do you know something to be true?
How do you know that that you know?

questions of epistemology...

Experimentalism is one way to discover knowledge, but it isn't the only way. It is actually quite limited in its scope. One reason a conversation is difficult with an evolutionist is there is usually not an agreement on epistemology. There are understood rules like not violating the law of non-contradiction etc, but as a whole both sides usually have different presuppositions regarding how one can know something to be true.

Reminds me of a fable from Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, whose lead character, Captain Lemuel Gulliver, made a description of the "architect" of Lagado. This description is courtesy of the mathematical physicist and theoretical biologist Hubert P. Yockey:
"This architect contrived a new method for building houses by starting at the roof and working down and establishing a foundation at the end of the project. The architect pointed out that among the obvious advantages of this method is that once the roof was in place the workers could toil in the shade of the hot sun and at other times be protected from rain and snow. Thus, inclement weather would not delay the progress of the construction. The Grand Academy of Lagado had approved this proposal by peer review, but the architect had not yet put it into practice at the time of Captain Gulliver's visit."

Don't you just love it??? :^)

Very appropriate passage to share here, thanks! I've never read Gulliver's Travels... sounds like a book to add to the "to-do" list... thanks betty boop!