Hilary Putnam on the Philosophy of Science: Section 4
Top Comments
All Comments (38)
-
It truly amazes me the number of people who still refuse to agree with the theory of evolution in the United States. It's very embarrassing.
-
Putnam taught Marxism for a short period of time, I'd be interested in hearing more about this.
-
lol
-
@bucles2000 I'd be interested to read it. I'm even more interested in how you think quantum mechanics and general relativity displays a lack of imagination, while simultaniously asserting that you've come up with a unified field theory using just classical mechanics.
-
@mightyafrowhitey I have a manuscript to prove it. Just 54 pages.
-
@tristramshandy3 very well said!!!
-
@bucles2000 a complete lack of imagination?!?!? was that meant to be a joke? if so, the punchline completely eludes me...
-
@PKDana I don't think it's imperceivable. but there is no way to objectively perceive is as it really is. because to do so, we would have to stand outside of the universe. if the universe is defined as everything there is in the physsical world, any observer will himself be a part of the universe he is perceiving, and even with our very best instruments we will still be able to pierce only so deep into the fabric of existence.
-
@nazra7 I'm a little unclear as to what you mean by the soul.
I wish Putnam had talked more on functionalism of the mind.
ContraWagner 3 years ago 5
I disagree. Putnam never dismisses the insight and work that is produced in biology, he only talks about the methodologies in biology and how they, at the time, do not pose the same conceptual importance/difficulty as the methodologies that physicists had been doing. Biology still falls under the methodologies that were popularized by physicists, so the focus on physics is easy to understand. The central topic in this programme [in 1987] is the methodologies, not the specific theories.
loganINTJ 3 years ago 4