The Limits of Science - Is Science itself a strange loop

[Joel3102]

 

In this video, he goes on to explain the presuppositions of science, where are themselves not/could ever be scientifically tested. For example the Species-Individual Structure, which would state individual 'things' should exhibit the same properties universally. This presupposition of science must already be accepted as true, therefore science cannot objectively test its own presuppositions. Is there scientific method itself therefore a strange loop that isn't grounded in anything ultimately? 

Edited December 4, 2017 by Joel3102

[Leo Gura]

All webs of belief are groundless of course.

I haven't even gotten into that topic yet.

[Joseph Maynor]

Science is a subject category, a thought, a general concept, that contains some general principles and properties, and contains some historical baggage too.  But the thing I wanna emphasize here is that Science is a cubby-hole, a category, a thought.  Science doesn't exist in the same way that a rock exists.  We make too much of Science.  It is a piece of cultural baggage that we inherited.  Forget about Science and just focus on whether the piece of knowledge at issue is credible or not in the given context.  Science is by-passable, it is not a mandatory category.  Focus on whether or not the piece of knowledge at issue is credible rather than whether or not it is Science.  Think of Knowledge as being like a grab-bag of concepts, heuristics, principles, and tools that you carry around with you because you feel like they might come in handy to solve future problems.  Stop thinking of Knowledge as needing to be true.  Stop thinking of Science as needing to be true.  Those are Mind traps.

Edited December 4, 2017 by Joseph Maynor

[Feeble Dave]

I agree that Science is a "groundless system of concepts", but I don't understand one thing. How come this "system" is verified by experiments in the 'physical' world?

 

For example, experimental data says that the water molecule H2O is a 'V' shape. Does that mean that water molecules aren't V shaped. Are water molecules just a concept? How do we know that they are just a concept. Just because they don't appear as distinguished perceptions doesn't mean they don't 'exist' as very small V shaped perceptions right? -Perceptions that look V shaped and take up a V shaped amount of space in the 'physical world. Perhaps we could see these perceptions if we had a powerful enough microscope?

 

[Leo Gura]

@Feeble Dave Concepts can mirror reality in a very simplified and crude way.

A model is a loose abstraction of the territory.

Notice that to make predictions you can use all sorts of alternative metaphysical models.

The power of mathematical modeling is precisely in that it is so abstract as to say nothing about anything other than the observed RELATIONSHIPS between two variables.

[Feeble Dave]

I see. I need to keep this in mind.

[Nahm]

What if all science degree’s were a minor to a major in Self?

???