Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pbradley
One thing I've been really offended by recently was the shit philosophy that goes on between Richard Dawkins-loving atheist scientists and intelligent design creationists. For instance, some poncy armchair scientist argued that the philosophy of science is entirely irrelevant to science.
|
That's amusing, I've been whinging about pop-athiests like Dawkins in a PM dialogue with a certain member of this board recently.
I find that while a lot of scientists will give a lot of time to philosophy in general, they tend to not concern themselves with the philosophers
of science - your Poppers, Feyerabends, Lakatoses, Kuhns... actually, I can't think of any other philosophers of science at the moment. Hmm. I think it's like aesthetic philosophy/ critical theory, their relationship to the art world is always that of observation, artists themselves often prefer to get on with it rather than observe themself as a process.