How reliable is science? (Assumption 2/7) (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Thursday, April 26, 2012, 01:12 (4593 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Humiliation can definitely be an effective teaching tool. I am too introverted to be a good teacher for a classroom sized group, for smaller groups of 5 -10 I do really well. I don't have the patience for dealing with the gaps in basic knowledge anymore than you do, and routinely find myself frustrated with these situations at work. The frustrating thing for me is not so much that I want a framework that WORKS(though that is true to an extent), it is that I wan't a framework that doesn't exclude things which it is dependent on. To me that is like building a house with a foundation and no plumbing, just because you are not a plumber, and expecting whomever resides there to never use the restroom, take a shower, or wash their hands. So, my disagreement with you is not so much about the scientific method, which I have great respect for, but rather with the way the people who create that frame work cut out the things that they are logically dependent upon. 
> -At what point are you willing to accept basic assumptions though? Are you arguing that every paper should include a statement saying that for its findings to hold, the assumption of "methodological materialism" must hold? I'm a philosopher by hobby, but seriously, I'm not going to write every single assumption from genesis to the present just in case some poor sap might not get all my assumptions! That's the job for science journalists and -
...professional philosophers!!!! 
...educated laypeople!!!! (Such as ourselves.) -But journalists and philosophers are the ones who need to translate the papers into lay terms. If there's a fault in regards to the layman, it's in translation. And a lack of diligence. -I'm never going to argue that science is perfect, especially in reference to response time, but it works. -> (And I work with gps systems a lot where our confidence is generally measured as an error ellipse defined by the semi-major/semi-minor axis. I like it because it it measures our errors in multiple directions, instead of issuing a blanket 95% confidence measurement.)-Ah. In my work, errors are usually measured in "who made the last commit" and putting a tally mark next to the guys name. -First one to reach two has to buy everyone coffee.-[EDIT]-Obviously joking, but as an engineer: use the error mechanism that makes the most sense.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"