bustrouffi

@bustrouffi@sopuli.xyz

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨science never ends⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  So you agree but you felt the way I wrote it was disdainful, and you thought I didn’t choose a good example.

  Perhaps I should have said something along the lines of ‘modern scientific cultural norms are influenced by the European Enlightenment.’

  I specifically didn’t mention falsfiabilty and logical positivism etc as I wanted to keep the comment light and accessible.

  I was suggesting they read more because it’s generally a good idea to read more about things you’re interested in.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨science never ends⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  No.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨science never ends⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Holy moly, champ!

  I didn’t say maths was from Europe, and I didn’t say Europeans invented 2+2=4 and I certainly didn’t say 2+2 could or should equal 5.

  Also, honestly sincere genuine question - what am I gatekeeping and where’s the disdain for Enlightenment ideals? Please quote me!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨science never ends⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  It is a method! That method is predicted on European Enlightenment avowals of what constitutes an acceptable boundary of truth, an acceptable methodology, and the primacy of certain measurements. That’s the subjective part.

  2+2 does equal 4. That doesn’t mean valuing 4 as an answer or valuing the act of valuing of the certainty of 2+2=4 is an objective position.

  Love k onto Philosophy of Science - this is not a controversial perspective.