Changes

== Notable examples ==

== Notable examples ==

*In the postmodern science, the traditional [[scientific method]] demanding from scientists to provide the [[scientific evidence]] for their [[hypothesis]] and conduct [[experiment]]s was replaced by [[logic of possibility]]. This [[paradigm]] shift in [[science]] can be demonstrated at a representative example, the description of research by [[Alan Guth]], where a claim is made about tests being performed in a '' 'hypothetical laboratory' ''<ref>{{cite web|title=Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics|publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://web.mit.edu/physics/people/faculty/guth_alan.html|quote=}}</ref>: <blockquote>''"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible.{{#tag:ref|cf."Physical scientists like [[Newton]] are not content to say that it ''may'' be so, and then build up theories based on bare possibilites."<ref>{{cite book |title=Darwin and his critics: the reception of Darwin's theory of evolution by the scientific community|author=David L. Hull|publisher=Harvard University Press|year=1973|pages=275|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=jkUzUb-xK4Ol4gS27IGYAQ&id=juTaAAAAMAAJ&dq=Hull+Darwin+and+his+critics&q=verb#search_anchor}}</ref>|group=note}} The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a wormhole and rapidly disconnect completely."</blockquote>'' Postmodern science does not lead to resolution of scientific questions but leaves them undecided by applying terms like '' 'a definite maybe' ''{{#tag:ref|cf."If one wishes to obtain a definite answer from Nature one must attack the question from a more general and less selfish point of view." [[Max Planck]]<ref>{{cite book |title=Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics|author=Alfred Korzybski|publisher=Institute of General Semantics|year=1995|pages=415|isbn=978-0937298015|url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Sanity-Introduction-Non-Aristotelian-Semantics/dp/0937298018}}</ref>|group=note}}. Consequently, the scientific discoveries are being replaced by the beliefs affected by worldview of scientist which are then effectively promulgated as [[Creed|statements of faith]] or scientific [[myth]] calling for public acceptance. The journal Science published in 2002 an article in which Charles Darwin is criticised for gamely nailing together a ''just-so story'' of how creation of complex organs might have happened.<ref>{{cite web |title=Placentas May Nourish Complexity Studies|author=Virginia Morell|publisher=Science Magazine|date=01-Nov-2002|accessdate=17-Mar-2013|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/content/298/5595/945.1.summary?sid=c4eced8d-4cde-4a65-89ee-67fe22a16f66|quote=It's one of the oldest riddles in evolutionary biology: How does natural selection gradually create an eye, or any complex organ for that matter? The puzzle troubled Charles Darwin, who nevertheless gamely nailed together just-so story of how it might have happened...}}</ref>

*In the postmodern science, the traditional [[scientific method]] demanding from scientists to provide the [[scientific evidence]] for their [[hypothesis]] and conduct [[experiment]]s was replaced by [[logic of possibility]] leading to extensive usage of [[doubletalk]] mixing the true or logically coherent information with unsubstantiated hypothetical speculations and [[logical fallacies]] such as [[Non sequitur]] thus making the resulting assertions exceedingly obscure and tedious. This [[paradigm]] shift in [[science]] can be demonstrated at a representative example, the description of research by [[Alan Guth]], where a claim is made about tests being performed in a '' 'hypothetical laboratory' ''<ref>{{cite web|title=Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics|publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://web.mit.edu/physics/people/faculty/guth_alan.html|quote=}}</ref>: <blockquote>''"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible.{{#tag:ref|cf."Physical scientists like [[Newton]] are not content to say that it ''may'' be so, and then build up theories based on bare possibilites."<ref>{{cite book |title=Darwin and his critics: the reception of Darwin's theory of evolution by the scientific community|author=David L. Hull|publisher=Harvard University Press|year=1973|pages=275|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=jkUzUb-xK4Ol4gS27IGYAQ&id=juTaAAAAMAAJ&dq=Hull+Darwin+and+his+critics&q=verb#search_anchor}}</ref>|group=note}} The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a [[wormhole]] and rapidly disconnect completely."</blockquote>'' Postmodern science does not lead to resolution of scientific questions but leaves them undecided by applying terms like '' 'a definite maybe' ''{{#tag:ref|cf."If one wishes to obtain a definite answer from Nature one must attack the question from a more general and less selfish point of view." [[Max Planck]]<ref>{{cite book |title=Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics|author=Alfred Korzybski|publisher=Institute of General Semantics|year=1995|pages=415|isbn=978-0937298015|url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Sanity-Introduction-Non-Aristotelian-Semantics/dp/0937298018}}</ref>|group=note}}. Consequently, the scientific discoveries are being replaced by the beliefs affected by worldview of scientist which are then effectively promulgated as [[Creed|statements of faith]] or scientific [[myth]] calling for public acceptance. The journal Science published in 2002 an article in which Charles Darwin is criticised for gamely nailing together a ''just-so story'' of how creation of complex organs might have happened.<ref>{{cite web |title=Placentas May Nourish Complexity Studies|author=Virginia Morell|publisher=Science Magazine|date=01-Nov-2002|accessdate=17-Mar-2013|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/content/298/5595/945.1.summary?sid=c4eced8d-4cde-4a65-89ee-67fe22a16f66|quote=It's one of the oldest riddles in evolutionary biology: How does natural selection gradually create an eye, or any complex organ for that matter? The puzzle troubled Charles Darwin, who nevertheless gamely nailed together just-so story of how it might have happened...}}</ref>

*Another example demonstrating the traits of Postmodern science can be given from interview with Joseph Silk, Savilian Professor of [[Astronomy]] at [[University of Oxford]]<ref name="ESA">{{cite web

*Another example demonstrating the traits of Postmodern science can be given from interview with Joseph Silk, Savilian Professor of [[Astronomy]] at [[University of Oxford]]<ref name="ESA">{{cite web