Date: 2011-10-20 10:53 pm (UTC)
scarylady: (Default)
From: [personal profile] scarylady
Philosophy (real philosophy, not the watery theosophy that sometimes passes for it) is the forerunner of science. Any new area - physics in Aristotle's time, or psychology in Freud's - begins with people compiling a body of evidence based on their senses and experiments, and constructing theories based on logic and sense. Only once the body of evidence is great enough and stable enough does the subject begin to attract the label of 'science'.

In Aristotle's time the immaterial - the metaphysical - included the elements. In Freud's it was mind and personality. Now it's more likely to be the possibility of non-physical being and survival of death and that's where the scientists get twitchy, I think. They need to bear their own roots in mind and let it pan out; it'll either turn out to be like physics and flourish, or like alchemy and die. Either is fine, provided it is properly observed and tested along the way.

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

writerslounge: (Default)
The Writers' Lounge

About

The Writers' Lounge is a friendly, informal chat, crit, discussion and resources group.

Have questions or want to discuss something? Fire away! Want some feedback on a piece of writing you're working on? Post it! Stuck with research, or found a fabulously useful resource others might benefit from? Step up and share!

We expect a level of maturity in our members, but we're open to all genres and levels of experience. Read full details on the comm profile or, if you need help, contact your friendly mods, [personal profile] intothewood and [personal profile] analect.

_____________________________
layout by [community profile] visualwit

February 2013

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728  

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags