Re: Anthropology and science

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: James Carrier: "Ta ta"
• Previous message: Nick Corduan: "Re: Worry"

Michael,

> Wow. Nick Coudran's points were great regarding anthropology as a

Thank you, sir. :)

> behavior. One concern is how general a prediction can be.

This is actually a good point, because some people -- and I am undecided on
this issue, myself -- are of the opinion that "real science" must be useful
in some fashion. (I don't mean utilitarian. I mean that the statements must
be of some use or application. For instance, some might debate whether a
layman's version of gravity -- What goes up must come down -- is at all
useful, and if not, they'd argue that it is no longer science.)

There is also a danger inherent in being generalistic that you will lose track
of usefulness. (And also the risk of redundancy is greater, which also
reduces usefullnes. For instance, a modern scientist of physics writing up a
paper based on the idea that "What goes up must come down" -- which isn't
necessarioly true, of course <g> -- would not be entirley useful, simply
because it's an old theme.)

> question itself. I'd like to hear more from other people on this

Hope that doesn't mean you're sick of hearing from me on it. <g>

Nick---

--

Nick Corduan                 "...there is as much dignity in tilling

     at                       a field as in writing a poem."

(nickc@iquest.net)                           --Booker T. Washington

• Next message: James Carrier: "Ta ta"
• Previous message: Nick Corduan: "Re: Worry"