| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - |
| Posted by: | Lee |
| Date/Time: | 30/05/2003 11:47:32 |
|
Hi GSM I know that this was hardly your point, but you wrote: 'I find the scientific method a more solid epistemology for determining the validity of a given model'. For the sake of clarity, Scientifc method is not an epistemology, it is a methodology - practitioners of this methodology have epistemologies which can and do vary although in general I would agree that the 'method' acts as an effective 'carrier wave' for an implicit epistemology that is largely the result of the history of the development of modern day science. For example, empiricism presupposes that in applying scientific method, they can objectively observe the 'facts', deduce the meaning of their observations and organise the 'facts' into a theory which explains them. In other words, the theory comes from the facts. As I am currently on a little adventure into other epistemologies at the minute, I am currently doubtful that this is the case, and that so called 'objective' science is anywhere as objective as it claims to be. There is more to be said on this subject if anyone out there is remotely interested! ;-) Lee |
| Topic | Date Posted | Posted By |
| Question to John Grinder - | 27/05/2003 19:07:59 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 27/05/2003 19:57:35 | John Grinder |
| Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 28/05/2003 10:04:10 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 28/05/2003 16:01:54 | John Grinder |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 28/05/2003 17:03:24 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 29/05/2003 16:37:50 | Ryan Nagy |
| Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 09:33:21 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 11:47:32 | Lee |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 11:55:02 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 12:22:19 | Lewis Walker |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 13:09:24 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 16:32:10 | Lewis Walker |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 17:00:35 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 17:02:57 | John Schertzer |
| Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 04/06/2003 09:25:36 | Robert |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 04/06/2003 23:01:47 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 11:20:06 | Lee |
| Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 12:12:28 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 12:16:40 | Lewis Walker |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 13:53:44 | John Schertzer |
| Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 15:38:54 | Golf Swing Modeler |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 30/05/2003 13:54:21 | John Schertzer |
| Re:Question to John Grinder - | 02/06/2003 04:31:07 | Ryan Nagy |
| Re:Re:Question to John Grinder - | 02/06/2003 09:37:53 | Golf Swing Modeler |