Yes.It's not the job of science (or philosophy) to prove things, but to produce better theories.
www.amazon.com/Retreat-Commitment-William-Warren-Bartley/dp/081269127X
(,
Mon 4 Dec 2006, 17:19,
archived)
www.amazon.com/Retreat-Commitment-William-Warren-Bartley/dp/081269127X
I would love to get into this conversation morebut I feel my knowledge of the various theories is too shallow.
(
mr horrible up yours, dickface,
Mon 4 Dec 2006, 17:23,
archived)
Meh, I bet you know it all alreadyafter years of exposure to me and Leigh and Rob and other Popper fans. Gotta go, anyway, bye.
(,
Mon 4 Dec 2006, 17:28,
archived)
You can prove something DOES existhowever it is impossible to prove that something DOESN'T. It's known as falsifiability.
For example, the statements, "All ravens are black" and "No ravens are white" are not proveable - even if you gathered up all the ravens currently in the universe, you cannot account for all the possible ravens that might spring into existence between now and the end of time, or even those that have already ceased to exist.
However, the statement "Some ravens are black" is proveable, obviously, you just have to see a black raven.
Hence I agree entirely with the sentiments above about Dawkins being an unremitting twunt.
(For example, the statements, "All ravens are black" and "No ravens are white" are not proveable - even if you gathered up all the ravens currently in the universe, you cannot account for all the possible ravens that might spring into existence between now and the end of time, or even those that have already ceased to exist.
However, the statement "Some ravens are black" is proveable, obviously, you just have to see a black raven.
Hence I agree entirely with the sentiments above about Dawkins being an unremitting twunt.
Hamster Trippin' aka Mr. Titts,
Mon 4 Dec 2006, 17:29,
archived)