4
The thought experiment is known as Chrysippus’s Dog and goes back to the named ancient Stoic. It was discussed by many modern philosophers, including Dennett, see Chrysippus’s Dog as a Case Study in Non-Linguistic Cognition by Rescorla for a survey. Here is the description of Chrysippus's dog given by Sextus Empiricus:
"[Chrysippus] declares that the ...
3
Probably an ill-formed question. Notice you are using the concepts "describe reality" and "understanding reality".
Expecting science to provide a complete description of reality is like expecting a map to be identical to the terrain in all possible senses.
Science is not intended to describe reality. Moreover, knowledge (science is just a ...
3
The main reason which justifies punishment of evolved behaviours, is to impose a fitness cost upon harmful behaviours.
It matters not whether the person is blameworthy for having been bestowed with such behaviour, or even whether they can change it under their own will. The behaviour will be under pressure to change and be weeded out simply by imposing the ...
3
While this may strike others as an opinion-based question, I am going to buck that trend and claim that science itself answers this question, and therefore, properly cited, is a question that is a good fit for our site. So, don't let anyone inside or outside the analytic science school of thinking dissuade you from asking about the relationship between ...
2
When Auguste Comte and a host of followers delineated two categories of qualities, Primary and Secondary, he included in the first only those things which could be measured; solidity, extension, motion, rest and number. The secondary qualities were relegated to the subjective world of individual experience; color, taste, smell and sound. That's where the ...
2
"Science is not enough for a complete understanding of our reality"
"Our reality" depends on an understanding of being. We have a handle on extant beings - the things we can observe, or for which we can infer various aspects of existence. We have much less of a handle on the living beings that do the observing (or creating). For ...
1
To answer this question you first have to know what physicists mean when they refer to physical laws.
To a physicist, a physical law is a rule which appears to account for the behavior of a physical system in such a manner as to allow the physicist to apply that rule to predict the outcome of an unperformed experiment or to explain the outcome of a performed ...
1
Premise 1: There might be some phenomena in Reality that cannot be grasped, studied, and experimented with science (e.g. the existence and nature of God(s))
Premise 2: Science cannot tell whether that is the case or not (e.g. science cannot disprove the existence of Allah or Krishna)
Conclusion: Since science cannot tell whether science has complete grasp of ...
1
The terms "our reality," "complete understanding" and the "scientific approach," need more robust definition. As is, answers to you query will be hit and miss affairs that may fail to fully satisfy (cf the varieties of answers you’ve received already, including my own). Moreover, while all are anti-realists, and claim that ...
1
Many genes need to meet with the correct environment. FoxP2, 'the language gene', is known to trigger babbling during development. In wild cockatiels individuals may be assigned names, and have emergency calls, and flock calls that build cohesion and call to roost. But raised by humans, they mimic human speech & music. Like this. Gene and behaviour, in ...
1
One argument might be that science doesn't have a "complete understanding of reality". And that is the case from psychology to physics.
The claim that science never will never be all there is to know, is not especially postmodern. Descartes was an early modern philosopher, who claimed
Thus the whole of philosophy is like a tree. The roots are
...
1
A few thoughts:
-do all of these conceptual questions still cause difficulties if everything is expressed purely in mathematical terms and in full without abbreviations? I don't have the right typeset on my computer but, for example, I think that if you typed out the formula for mean velocity in full it would be quite clear what is meant by saying that it ...
1
Yes Academia.com allows you to submit what appears to be papers but they don't have to be published. You can submit published ones also. You make a profile for yourself.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
