
Originally Posted by
JimJones8934
I challenge you to find someone that disagrees with the scientific method AND understands it!
Ask and receive 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
Sir Karl Raimund Popper, CH FRS[3] FBA (28 July 1902 – 17 September 1994) was an Austro-British[4] philosopher and professor at the London School of Economics.[5] He is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century.[6][7] He also wrote extensively on social and political philosophy. In 1992 he was awarded the Kyoto Prize in Arts and Philosophy for "symbolising the open spirit of the 20th century"[8] and for his "enormous influence on the formation of the modern intellectual climate".[8]
Popper is known for his attempt to repudiate the classical observationalist/inductivist form of scientific method in favour of empirical falsification. He is also known for his opposition to the classical justificationist account of knowledge which he replaced with critical rationalism, "the first non justificational philosophy of criticism in the history of philosophy".[9] In political discourse, he is known for his vigorous defence of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he came to believe made a flourishing "open society" possible.
There are a number of people that attack the scientific method on philosophical grounds. Others who attack its practical implementation as being corrupted by politics and cultural norms. And there are those who attack its fundamental value to society as less satisfying that more traditional knowledge systems.
On ODN you will find eye4Magic who while not challenging the validity of science, challenges its ability to access spiritual truths due to its myopic focus on material reality.
I'm not inclined to agree with any of that myself. For me, the proof is in the pudding. Science gets the job of finding consistent knowledge reliably, more reliably than any other system we have available to us. Others have a spotty record of truth claims you can act on and get consistent results.
---------- Post added at 11:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 AM ----------

Originally Posted by
Rodriguez
The word "God" has WAY too much baggage for that to work. You may as well try to rename the universe "Satan."
Sort of. Keep in mind that "God" had an actual name back in the day and was more or less one of many gods. And even the God of today has various names in various cultures. God is a generic term after all, a trick of language to emphasize exclusivity. Its like calling my cat Cat because no other cat is truly a cat, only a shadow of Cat. I try not to let folks rob us of useful language.
Bookmarks