Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:18:56 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Tim Rich offered some interesting comments about Why and Purpose in
science, including the following:
>...I think that scientists are also very concerned with WHY in
>many cases, I know that medical scientists are, [since] WHY leads to important
>cures. A complete understanding of science needs to include WHY. Original
>purpose is definitely theological; furthermore the WHY of PURPOSE must
>remain in the realm of theology.
********
Yes, all of us in science begin an experimental program with Why
questions (an inescapable starting point, actually). I covered that point
in the following two publications:
1989 Wenner, A.M. Concept centered versus organism centered biology.
AMERICAN ZOOLOGIST. 29:1177-1197. and a simplified version:
1993 Wenner, A.M. Science as a process: The question of bee "language."
BIOS. 64:78-83.
Those on BEE-L can contact me directly to obtain a copy of the 1993
publication.
One can find a much earlier treatment of the changing nature of "fact"
in the following publication:
Fleck, Ludwik. 1935 GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT OF A SCIENTIFIC FACT [in
fractured German]. (translated into English and republished in 1979 by
the Univ. of Chicago Press). [1-(800) 621-2736 --- ISBN: 0-226-25325-2]
That paperback book actually costs only about $15 U.S.
In other words, I suspect Tim Rich and I are on the same wave length on
a good many points, though perhaps living in different theological worlds.
Adrian
Adrian M. Wenner (805) 963-8508 (home phone)
967 Garcia Road (805) 893-8062 (UCSB FAX)
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
****************************************************************************
*
* "Nature only answers rightly when she is rightly questioned."
*
* Goethe
****************************************************************************
|
|
|