[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: List User-related request

Ah, a terminology discussion...

myth is a standard term for a scientific idea that lacks adequate

Common maybe, in certain places and certain languages, but by no means standard. This use for the meaning "story that's probably wrong", "nonsense" seems to have originated as an insult.


Evidence. There is no proof in science. It is possible to prove _beyond reasonable doubt_, sure, but not to define exactly which doubt is "reasonable".

or that has been disproven but still has devoted adherents.

Then it's still a scientific hypothesis, not a myth -- the object of science theory, not of mythology. It's merely wrong, and its adherents are either ignorant (that is, they don't know the evidence against the hypothesis) or lying to themselves (or both); if they are merely ignorant, they haven't even ceased to behave as scientists.

Humans are an ideological species, and
science contains as many myths as any other field of endeavor.

Myths are by definition not science.

I am personally a little tired of hearing half the things I say called myth,
especially when I really didn't know I was saying something I was saying
something I was likely to be expected to put up a protracted argument to
defend ; but it goes with the territory. Why would anyone who didn't feel
strongly about truth bother to be a scientist?

Truth? I think you should think again.

Science doesn't care as much about truth as simply about reality. Truth could contain all manner of supernatural phenomena -- which are not testable and therefore outside science. Reality -- observable, measurable reality -- is what science is about. Whether a theory adequately describes reality is measurable. Whether a theory adequately describes truth is impossible to tell because we can't recognize truth (at least not by means of science) even if we have it -- truth is not measurable, unless we preassume that truth _is_ reality, which is itself not a testable and therefore not a scientific hypothesis. Science deliberately ignores all quests for whatever truth might be and explores reality. That's what "methodological naturalism" means.

"Science is a narrow discipline", as HP Matt Bonnan says.

Click here http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/evol/evolfact.htm for a very good explanation of what terms such as "fact" or "theory" mean. "Myth" is not on that page because it's not even in the same ballpark.