posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 03:47 AM
The problem with science and scientists is of course that there is no such thing. It's just a convenient and frightfully imprecise term that is used
to lump together a whole diverse body of different academical fields. Each with is own set of methods.
The is a huge difference between how a phycisist and say a historian or archaeologist do their studies. You cannot measure or record something that
happened 3000 years ago. But, surely, nobody would claim we should quit studying our history, or prehistory, just because we cannot measure it?
You cannot just say "there is no physical proof" so this is not science. Where is the physical proof that Napoleon Bonaparte was present at the battle
of Waterloo? Show me the physical proof that Julius Caesar was assasinated? Where is the proof that Christopher Columbus sailed to America?
This line of reasoning will get us nowhere when studying what people have experienced. There is no call to abandon the study of a field just because
you cannot put it under a microscope.
And science is not only chemistry, biology and physics. We would be rather helpless to make sense of the world if we thought that.
edit on 13-3-2016 by beetee because: (no reason given)