| </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (damnrad,)
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
there is no necessary connection between events...
to claim that it will happen in the future because it has always done so in the past is an error, the inductive fallacy... <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
Science assumes that past events provide insight into future events, that there is a connection between events, that cause and effect are useful concepts, that it should try to explain as much as possible in as deterministic a way as possible, that inductive reasoning is useful, that parsimony is good, and so on. You don't like some of those assumptions? To bad for you -- science has a good track record. What track record do you have?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
assumption is not truth... usefulness is not truth... science is great, but it isn't the truth (neither is religion for that matter)
"I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..."
insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results... |