I was actually thinking the other way around: we choose the science (method of inquiry) that supports our worldview so that we can claim that what we say is 'scientific', and refute that other methods of inquiry leading to different worldviews are scientific. But luckily I am not the only one who has a problem with Popper's falsification methods ....

PDM

On Dec 9, 2007 8:31 AM, Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 7, 2007, at 6:59 AM, paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> ...

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation
>
> In this account, there is no 'collapse', so its a hard stretch to
> posit that consciousness causes or results from it.
>
> luckily we can all have our favourite choice of science to justify
> our views of the world

So, let's see, we have our worldview and then we choose the science
that fits. Great! I choose Young Earth Creationism. Man, that was
easy!

-chris

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto: ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ 
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ 
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  (01)