02-25-2012, 12:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-25-2012, 01:45 PM by 13TreeofLife13.)
(02-25-2012, 10:31 AM)zenmaster Wrote: You then might be surprised to know that many scientists indeed already follow this approach, and have been since the creation of the scientific method, relying heavily on the intuition in order to hypothesize in the first place. I'd submit that the limitations (as used in science) are generally helpful and wise if one understands why the constraints are used in the first place.Creating constraints that revolve around our current understanding of the universe is a mistake. I think we overestimate how much we know about the universe. Furthermore, I am not one to necessarily trust what I am told by the scientific community. I just don't have as much faith in approaching everything in a scientific manner as it seems you do. Approaching the universe solely by logical reasoning would simplify the complexity of the universe. The product of disagreeing with me would imply that we have a different set of philosophical beliefs. That is why I find this discussion obsolete. Nevertheless, I do enjoy your input.
Science is one of the best approaches to rationalizing the info which is brought to attention through intuition. However, there is a long historical/traditional basis for particular thinking (in the sciences) which places more limitations on possible explanatory paradigms than what we call 'science' or the scientific method, itself, actually does. We tend to borrow old thought, seemingly the most tenable, in order to produce new thought.