science = determinism?

Frank Buckler fb at m2.ifb.uni-hannover.de
Thu Nov 25 05:26:13 EST 1999


Will Dwinnell <predictor at compuserve.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
383C0F17.2F1A at compuserve.com...
> Frank Buckler wrote:
> "All science have to make the asumtion thats its object is
> deterministic. If e.g. psychology does not, it leave the scientific path
> and enters religion."
>
> I (Will Dwinnell) wrote:
> "Science is the study of reality.  If reality is found to contain some
> random component, then shouldn't the above assumption be labeled dogma
> and the insistence on that assumption be 'religious'?"
>
> Frank Buckler responded:
> "Science tries to explain reality. The word "explain" contain the
> assumtion that there are some kind of determinism. The expierence of
> random, das not mean that there is no determinism. It only says that we
> can not explain it (till now)."
>
> My point is that this belief that there is no randomness in reality is
> an assumption.

I agree to this.
But it is a nessesery assumtion to enable future progress.

to the 2nd point:
If we find somthing random: we can say: "it is random" or "it apeers to be
random, because we dont know enoupg"
Both is induction reasoning, and both can be equaly true or false.
But the first is the end of research!







More information about the Neur-sci mailing list