Quote:
Irreligious wrote
So logic is an intrinsic part of the scientific method, no? Without logic, you have no scientific method, right? And without mathematics, the scientific method would be severely hamstrung as a vehicle for discerning the operations of the natural world, correct?
If so, that sounds to me like the scientific method encompasses more than mere observation.
|
Right, but think about it the other way. Without the empirical observation it isn't the naturalistic scientific method.
Quote:
Irreligious wrote
I think I see where you are going with this. Anyway, I'm not sure that there is any independent value in knowing that 2 + 2 = 4 if it's not otherwise going to be connected to some other bit of knowledge grounded in concrete reality.
As for logic, it's very dependent on premises. One can still follow an unchallenged false premise to a logical conclusion that would appear to be rational when, actually, it's not.
|
I'm not clear. Do you think you can you get knowledge from math and logic absent empirical observation? I think this is a yes or no question.
You seem to be hedging on this issue. Why?
Quote:
Irreligious wrote
I never said it was, nor did I ever suggest that the scientific method entailed mere observation and nothing more.
|
So, if empiricism is not the only way to acquire knowledge. What are the other ways?