1,660
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 102:
Line 102: + + + + + + + +
My two cents
Would the [http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html Encyclopedia of Philosophy] be of any help? [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/laws-of-nature/ Laws of nature] might be of use. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 21:07, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
Would the [http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html Encyclopedia of Philosophy] be of any help? [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/laws-of-nature/ Laws of nature] might be of use. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 21:07, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
== My two cents ==
I couldn't stay away, so here it is. Not meant pejoritively, the level of scientific education is not as high here as on WP, so I think this article will need some revision. Since no one has really come out and said it, this article is important not just for the info in it, but also because the definition somehow has become semantically linked to the evolution controversy.
That being said, if we are not going to have a separate article on scientific method, then this one needs to clarify theory and hypothesis. It probably should also digress a little into Popper and Kuhn, unfortunately.
Comments?--[[User:Palmd001|PalMD]] 17:38, 29 March 2007 (EDT)