Take psychology for example, or sociology, both areas where science starts getting a bit "soft".Because of this reputation, psych in particular has taken to making VERY sure their research experiments have REALLY good design and scientific method behind them
( ... )
Science cannot measure subjective experiences. That is not to say that subjective experiences did not happen, but they do not translate to someone who did not share the subjective experience. (This is one of my issues with religion- the 'Mine is Better than Yours, My Personal Rules Should Apply To You', Proselytizing nature of many of them).
I won't deny someone their Happy Shiny place in the Way Things Fit Together In All Of This. Nor should anyone.
Science does not work with metaphor. And Science does not work with "Mystery."
While a scientist may say that mystery is "Bullshit" (as many people do about a great many things *cough*cough*RichardDawkinsisadick*cough*cough*) science merely states that such subjective experiences (Mystery) are outside the realm of Science. Science, in this case, does not apply. At this point it (Mystery) becomes the proverbial story-telling around a fire. And really, that's a whole lot of fun right there and it's a great way to promote and share one's narrative
( ... )
Comments 2
Reply
I won't deny someone their Happy Shiny place in the Way Things Fit Together In All Of This. Nor should anyone.
Science does not work with metaphor. And Science does not work with "Mystery."
While a scientist may say that mystery is "Bullshit" (as many people do about a great many things *cough*cough*RichardDawkinsisadick*cough*cough*) science merely states that such subjective experiences (Mystery) are outside the realm of Science. Science, in this case, does not apply. At this point it (Mystery) becomes the proverbial story-telling around a fire. And really, that's a whole lot of fun right there and it's a great way to promote and share one's narrative ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment