Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Riddle of the Sphinx
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="+VGO.DVCKS, post: 6488180, member: 110504"]Sorry if this sounds like pontification --and only more so if that's what it's reducible to. But the genius of the scientific method, and of all disciplines that <i>aspire</i> to having an empirical basis, is that it's just that: a method. As such, an irreducibly unfinished project. If you're looking at a static collection of ostensibly definitive data (right, not subject to revision on the basis of <i>further</i> data), you're looking at something which is, for all intents and purposes --good or ill-- completely independent of science.</p><p>Cf. the now classic book, <u>The Structure of Scientific Revolutions</u> by Thomas Kuhn:</p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions</a>.</p><p>A central part of whose thesis is that the entire modern Western scientific tradition is predicated <i>both</i> on methodological conservatism, <i>and</i> the capacity to revise existing, (always temporary) 'canonical' theories in light of emerging data.</p><p>Segueing from the 'pure' sciences to their numerous disciplinary bastard children --just starting with history and anthropology-- it's like, something approximating the converse principle could also be true.</p><p>To back up a little, when Copernicus' heliocentric model of the galaxy first publicly saw the light of day (--posthumously; <i>he</i> knew the kind of sh-t he would get for it; cf. the later career of Galileo), it wasn't subject to immediate empirical confirmation.</p><p>Mostly because the attendant means of independent, empirical verification weren't even in place. For some reason that still makes no sense to me, the medieval church authorities had made Ptolemy's geocentric model a matter of theologico-cosmological dogma, and astronomers were kind of stuck knowing what side their bread was buttered on. It was a little like what you saw, in miniature, with the recent communal experience of Texas: the infrastructure, founded as it was on prefabricated ideology <i>rather</i> than known scientific data, wasn't there to begin with. (In a world reeking of false dichotomies, this <i>ain't</i> one of 'em.)</p><p>Similarly, in numismatic and other historical capacities, we Have to speculate. ...And (Only) then find out whether our premises were about anything. ...It's in this, specifically methodological context that something like 'overwhelming circumstantial evidence' starts to look like something vaguely better than an oxymoron.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="+VGO.DVCKS, post: 6488180, member: 110504"]Sorry if this sounds like pontification --and only more so if that's what it's reducible to. But the genius of the scientific method, and of all disciplines that [I]aspire[/I] to having an empirical basis, is that it's just that: a method. As such, an irreducibly unfinished project. If you're looking at a static collection of ostensibly definitive data (right, not subject to revision on the basis of [I]further[/I] data), you're looking at something which is, for all intents and purposes --good or ill-- completely independent of science. Cf. the now classic book, [U]The Structure of Scientific Revolutions[/U] by Thomas Kuhn: [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions[/URL]. A central part of whose thesis is that the entire modern Western scientific tradition is predicated [I]both[/I] on methodological conservatism, [I]and[/I] the capacity to revise existing, (always temporary) 'canonical' theories in light of emerging data. Segueing from the 'pure' sciences to their numerous disciplinary bastard children --just starting with history and anthropology-- it's like, something approximating the converse principle could also be true. To back up a little, when Copernicus' heliocentric model of the galaxy first publicly saw the light of day (--posthumously; [I]he[/I] knew the kind of sh-t he would get for it; cf. the later career of Galileo), it wasn't subject to immediate empirical confirmation. Mostly because the attendant means of independent, empirical verification weren't even in place. For some reason that still makes no sense to me, the medieval church authorities had made Ptolemy's geocentric model a matter of theologico-cosmological dogma, and astronomers were kind of stuck knowing what side their bread was buttered on. It was a little like what you saw, in miniature, with the recent communal experience of Texas: the infrastructure, founded as it was on prefabricated ideology [I]rather[/I] than known scientific data, wasn't there to begin with. (In a world reeking of false dichotomies, this [I]ain't[/I] one of 'em.) Similarly, in numismatic and other historical capacities, we Have to speculate. ...And (Only) then find out whether our premises were about anything. ...It's in this, specifically methodological context that something like 'overwhelming circumstantial evidence' starts to look like something vaguely better than an oxymoron.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Riddle of the Sphinx
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...