[MD] Psychiatry/Psychology

[David M]

Hi Krim

Good. Equally great new concepts can and do come
from outside of science. Was not Bohr inspired by
Kierkegaard? You might even therefore say religion
funnily enough. I suspect the most radical changes to
concepts are most likely to be found in the most
unlikely and distant places. Darwin took his ideas
from economic theory, etc etc.

DM

> [DM]
> Philosophy is one word, another is critical thinking.
> This seems to me key and goes further than science.
> Science stays focused on experience and experiments.
> But to do science or anything else we nee language
> and concepts. Philosophy and critical thinking get us to
> think about language and concepts, challenging them,
> checking out our understanding of them, asking if we need
> new concepts and new languages and suiggesting what these
> might be. Science started as natural philosophy and got going
> once the right concepts and approaches were available.
> It works well now, but we cannot assume that its current concepts
> are complete and fully adequate. It has many tricky problems, these
> may be overcome by experiments and experience, or they may
> need new concepts. This is why Einstein thought experiements are
> as much philosophy as science as they challenge and change our
> concepts.
>
> [Krimel]
> Fair enough for the most part but science relies on and produces critical
> thinking. Philosophy has no claim on a monopoly or even superiority in 
> that
> regard.
>
> No one in science assumes that "...its current concepts are complete and
> fully adequate."
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>