Philosophy of Science: Science is About Solving Puzzles

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Practitioners of normal science are expert puzzle-solvers.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 471 • Replies: 7

No top replies

Re: Philosophy of Science: Science is About Solving Puzzles

coberst wrote:

To what do you refer to when you say 'natural science'? Biology not Physics? Just a little curious as to what constitutes unnatural science.

I think saying science and technology are the same thing is a topic for conjecture.

Likewise calling what scientists do 'puzzle solving' doesn't make it any less creative. It's just a label. I could call improvisational musicians 'doodlers'. It may make it sound less impressive to the laymen, but anyone with an understanding at best ignores the negative connotation of the label - at worst they get insulted and throw punches at said labeller.

What is the main point you are trying to make?

0 Replies

Quote:

I suspect that it is a common mistake to think that natural sciences are so successful because of the creative faculties of the scientist rather than their ingenuity at puzzle solving. Kuhn and I think the success rests on the puzzle solving skills of the practitioners

I don't think that the biological sciences are anymore successful today, than the physical sciences. What would we be doing tonight, had neither the internet nor the computer been invented?

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

I don't think that the biological sciences are anymore successful today, than the physical sciences.

Australian scientists have successfully grown beating human heart tissue from stem cells. It's believed that in the near future, heart transplants will be a thing of the past. Seems like a success to me.

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

Miller wrote:

I don't think that the biological sciences are anymore successful today, than the physical sciences.

Australian scientists have successfully grown beating human heart tissue from stem cells. It's believed that in the near future, heart transplants will be a thing of the past. Seems like a success to me.

It's a sucess to grown the tissue in vivo. It is however,a long, long road from a cell that shows contractile properties to an organ such as the heart. And for my money, research efforts should be directed tpwards other areas of critical medical importance, such as cancer, AIDS, diabetes, etc.

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

Wilso wrote:
Miller wrote:

I don't think that the biological sciences are anymore successful today, than the physical sciences.

Australian scientists have successfully grown beating human heart tissue from stem cells. It's believed that in the near future, heart transplants will be a thing of the past. Seems like a success to me.

It's a sucess to grown the tissue in vivo. It is however,a long, long road from a cell that shows contractile properties to an organ such as the heart. And for my money, research efforts should be directed tpwards other areas of critical medical importance, such as cancer, AIDS, diabetes, etc.

I don't see why we can't do all of them - maybe the US could redirect a little of the money in plunges into developing technologies to kill people into medical research - just 1% would be a startling revelation I'm sure...

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

Quote:
I suspect that it is a common mistake to think that natural sciences are so successful because of the creative faculties of the scientist rather than their ingenuity at puzzle solving. Kuhn and I think the success rests on the puzzle solving skills of the practitioners

I don't think that the biological sciences are anymore successful today, than the physical sciences. What would we be doing tonight, had neither the internet nor the computer been invented?

I consider biology and physics are both natural sciences. I suspect we would be reading or watching TV if we did not have the Internet.

0 Replies

Philosophy of Science: Science is About Solving Puzzles

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know