Today astronomers have decided that Pluto is not in fact a planet. But if I had said that Pluto was a planet ten years ago, it would have been true. Wouldn't it? or was it true even then to have said that 'Pluto is not a planet'? Was Pluto ever a planet?
2006-08-24 06:47:44 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Since you are asking this in philosophy, what you are asking is "How true or valid are scientific categorizations? If Pluto can be a planet one day and not the next, doesn't this mean scientific truth is merely what we decide it is?".
The answer to that question is no....and yes.
In changing the status of Pluto, science is merely doing what it has always done, put something in what specialists have decided (no doubt carefully decided) is a more appropriate or accurate category. Look at the history of taxonomy in biology and you will see that it has been a continuous process of refinement.
On the other hand, the question remains. Is our refinement of taxonomies in all the sciences moving towards an 'objective' truth about things? No, not strictly objective - that is impossible - we can only know things the way humans can know them. But that's okay, because there is no other way we possibly could know them.
2006-08-24 11:06:36 · answer #1 · answered by brucebirdfield 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well,Pluto probably was a planet. But astronomers never decided which size a space ,,rock,, needs to be so it could go around the Sun as a PLANET. There is a 10th rock from the sun. It is a bit larger then Pluto. Is it a Planet? In a few years we will know.
2006-08-24 08:01:07 · answer #2 · answered by Deki 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pluto is an spheric ball of rock and frozen methane gas that orbits around the sun. Is it a planet, is it not a planet? It really doesn't matter. Whether we label it as a planet or not, pluto will still be there, with it's spheric shape and its incessant orbiting around the sun. The fundamentals won't change.
Us humans have the compulsive need to be labelling and classifying everything around us, instead of simply enjoying their existance.
Besides, Pluto should be happy. I'd rather be called a "celestial body" than a planet.
2006-08-24 07:39:18 · answer #3 · answered by Eclipse 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on the definition of the word "planet"[1] The way the planet USED to be defined -- Pluto was a planet. Now a change in the definition looms[2], which might leave Plato out.
2006-08-24 07:27:12 · answer #4 · answered by hq3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well NASA and the government are retarded, so if they would have gone out a little further then they would have seen more pluto-like "planets". They would have either considered them to be planets as well, which I doubt, or they would have never considered pluto a planet. So no, it was never technically a planet.
2006-08-24 08:01:46 · answer #5 · answered by Princess Gemini 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it was a planet according to science when it was discovered until today. Unfortunately they changed the "standards" of a planet and Pluto is now no longer considered. Makes Science class seem outdated, doesn't it?
2006-08-24 07:31:05 · answer #6 · answered by Kat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the definition of a planet. It used to be a planet with old astronomer's definition.
2006-08-24 06:54:14 · answer #7 · answered by Quangtomo 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"planet" is just a label, as they refine the meaning of this label they have decided that pluto does not fall under this.
but in 15 years they could change their minds so who really knows.
2006-08-24 07:28:21 · answer #8 · answered by phalsephasod 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well we just thought it was a planet. But no actually it is a moon. They are just now getting the technology to confirm this. Who knows the Earth could actually be a moon. There is a new planet that is inbetween us and mars
2006-08-24 06:53:56 · answer #9 · answered by Samantha Brooke 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pluto exists. Did it ever matter what label we gave it? Did the label change it in any fundamental way?
2006-08-24 07:29:08 · answer #10 · answered by lcraesharbor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋