Sentences with phrase «of objective science»

Yet another Problem with the Petition Project is the Science — A complete lack of objective science!

The problem is that people have mistaken a simple narrative «superficially in the culturally potent idiom of objective science» for a profound scientific insight.

His claims must be treated with appropriate skepticism, particularly when he ventures outside the realm of objective science and into the pandemonium of politics and public affairs.

3) Given (2) how is it possible to discriminate between the notions of objective science and Tautological Accretion and Revisionism (TAR)?

The researchers, who published their findings in Environmental Research Letters, admit they may never convince the most steadfast chemtrail believers, but they wish to build a foundation of objective science to inform the general population so they won't believe such a «paranoid fantasy.»

Finally Kant banished metaphysics from the realm of objective science because, unlike physics, it deals with realities not perceptible to the senses.

Ironically, since the time Wiebe began his crusade the kind of intellectual agenda that worries him most — calling into question the very canons of objective science — has entered the academic scene not through theologians but through postmodern philosophy and radical forms of cultural criticism.

Not exact matches

In science, such an utter failure on one's predictive track record is a fair and objective measure of the falsification of one's hypotheses.

«Ilse and John are committed to taking MaRS forward to the next phase of its mandate — a bold set of objectives to capitalize on our immense research output in science and technology.

The conclusion just reached suggests that supposedly value - free political science has had value commitments in spite of itself, at least to the extent that it affirms happiness to be a private matter.5 In addition, I am persuaded that political science explicitly based upon a preferential view of self - interest always implicitly invokes an objective criterion of happiness.

But, like Samuel Florman, who fears that «flights through cyberspace, however energizing they may be for the imagination, may weaken the objective rationality needed to do good engineering», I agree with Alan Cromer that the formal linear thinking needed to do science «goes against the grain of traditional human thinking, which is associative and subjective» (Florman 1994).

Röpke's approach recognizes the objective aspects of the economic science but insists that normative values lie at its core; a healthy polity must move beyond calculations of utility if it is to uphold just and humane economic institutions.

This theological perspective has a profound implications for the correction of the scientific epistemology, which tends to regard as the objective and objectifying process, although nowadays there are efforts to correct this situation among the scientists and philosophers of science.

Hey, Dean: You're another fine, shining example why Bible thumpers are mindless sheep and fools who are afraid of objective observation, science and education... from the DICTIONARY:

Science, however, is a partial, objective attempt to discover facts about the empirical aspects of existence; Christian faith is an inclusive, committed approach to the totality of life's meaning as this comes to us through the revelation of God in Jesus Christ.

The present - day methodology of history and science as an accurate accounting of historical events and an objective description of physical processes simply didn't exist when these stories were composed.

Sure this still shows the objective, experiential heart of science but that is not all that science is.

I do not think questions of faith are ones that are ultimately decided by empirical and objective proof — that is for the realm of science.

He brings out the subjective reception of objective, ontological, truth and love in all our knowing (see n. 34), directly denied by materialistic philosophy of science.

science is not everything, the problem is when the critical and objective philosophy of science is accepted as absolute in reality.God is beyond logic at this point of our consciousness, The process of gods will manfistation is evolution which accepts all variables in the process, the input could be not what scienctists wants.Thats why faith or religion is part of reality.

Rudolf Otto in Germany, Gerardus van der Leeuw in the Netherlands and other assertively theological scholars discarded their predecessor's legacy and recaptured for confessional interests a discipline on the verge of becoming an objective science.

They consider science a dubious venture even though objective evidence of it's success is everywhere around us for all to independently verify.

A review of a book by Donald Wiebe attacking present day religious studies as less than the objective science they were originally supposed to be.

Science is an objective tool that gives us results we have to interpret and then can use to prove and disprove theories with varying levels of probability.

Just as we may argue that there is a unity of aims, objectives and approach underlying and generating empirical science, however greatly scientific beliefs may change and develop from age to age, so we may argue that there is an analogous unity underlying and generating Christian belief and practice.

to claim science somehow eliminates metaphysics is to fail to understand the difference between science (a * human * [& thus philosophically subjective] discipline of observation) and scientism (putting objective faith in science).

3) you appear to be confusing science (a discipline of human observation... and therefore — philosophically speaking — a subjective enterprise) with scientism (putting metaphysical faith in that human observation — an objective enterprise).

Maybe it would be better to say that I think science is a more accurate (as opposed to «true») way of trying to understand what objective reality actually is?

True, objective science like the observations outlined by Charles Darwin describe aspects of Nature that simply MUST BE.

A recognition of the implications of the I - Thou relation for epistemology would not mean a rejection of those essential and eminently useful objective techniques which the social sciences have developed.

It appears likely that scientific psychology will eventually fulfill its promise as the culminating natural science of man and that this will occur when the essential data of critical self - awareness are integrated with the methods of objective behavioral observation and inference.

My objective in this short essay has been to show that in «stripping off the shell of the out - of - date science, we find the permanently valid kernel of... [Aquinas's] thought on the soul,» as John Saward wrote in Redeemer in the Womb.

Modern science's discovery of objective facts is no exception to this basic pattern of human observation.

The physical sciences and the life sciences also yield their full harvest of knowledge about man only when the understanding gained through direct self - consciousness is used in the interpretation of the methods and results of objective scientific investigation and of technical invention.

The facts of science are not hard, cold, inert chunks of objective information lying about in the external world waiting to be discovered and accumulated by the industrious investigator.

Just as physics reveals little of significance about man until one reflects on the enterprises of science and technology, so scientific psychology, aiming to out - do physics in objective rigor, can yield little insight about man until the distinctive human quality of self - awareness is acknowledged as an essential factor in psychological inquiry.

It is a commonplace of modern science that facts are one thing and values quite another, that we can rely on objective scientific knowledge, while subjective metaphysical thinking (the logical positivists would say) is dubious and to be avoided whenever possible.

They will put all objective knowledge in the realm of science, and leave to religion only subjective belief.

But the purposes, goals, uses and meanings got left outside the concept of scientific explanation — in the mind, in the church, in the domain of ethics, relative and subjective, while science was said to be objective, positivistically true.

Christianity, and in fact any religion that believes in a personal god / creator, has two fundamental flaws that have absolutely nothing to do with science and everything to do with logic, which incidentally forms the foundation for the only universal / objective truths of reality (putting aside the Cartesian dualism problem).

Modern empiricism, on the other hand, which locates the possibilities of science in the brain (as if the brain and its patterns of order were not also in part a construction of the scientist's mind), precisely reverses this: the outside world known by the senses is alone the seat of what is — if anything is — universal, objective, real and certain.

If, as science claims (and its claims are stronger because they are verifiable empirically), the objective meaning of the world is what science says it is, then theological talk (if it claims to talk about the same world) must be metaphorical and subjective.

Science seeks in the objective world the causes of all the events that transpire in it.

There are, of course, questions which are prior in principle to the empirical sciences and which are presupposed to an objective and adequate statement of the problems of a possible real connection between man and the animal kingdom.

Consideration of both the methods and the limitations of science is a significant classroom objective.

Among philosophers of science the «idealists» emphasize the role of man's mind and the structure of ideas, while the «realists» emphasize the objective structure of the physical world.

In physics, for example, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle or principle of indeterminacy has been interpreted in three ways: 1) that the «laws of nature» are deterministic, and that any uncertainty is due to human ignorance, which in due time will be resolved by science (Einstein), 2) uncertainty can be always explained by present experimental limitations (Neils Bohr), and 3) indeterminacy is an objective characteristic of reality Werner Heisenberg).

First, Wilson seeks to unify knowledge by construing all knowledge as the kind of objective, empirically verifiable information intended by the natural sciences.

We need a new grounding of the very concepts of «truth» and «nature» as objective realities in the dynamic and inter-relative cosmos uncovered by modern science.

At the same time, however, they wanted to affirm fully and without question, lest they be thought religious fundamentalists, the same objective, analytic modes of modern science and historical analysis in every other domain besides faith.