2007-03-06 20:24:22 · 10 answers · asked by The Knowledge Server 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Primitive people such as yourself, simply prove thier stupidity at random, as they voice what's in there empty heads as facts..
2007-03-06 20:27:56 · answer #1 · answered by 1000 Man Embassy 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You might speak of some convenient fictions, like the presuppositions that all that exists, exists as (absolutely distinct) particulars, or the classification of gravity as an invisible force, an entity distinct from matter. But these are practical fudges that make the physical world mathematizable, and they are compensated for by re-integrating the concepts later on. If you're looking for something more like a real lie, you might look at the claim that the question of intelligent design lies within the domain of science, & that science has anything to say about it at all.
2007-03-06 20:39:07 · answer #2 · answered by G-zilla 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think science dwells upon lies. Not that I think science is always right or can or will ever solve all problems but from a general standpoint science is about the discovery of truth.
2007-03-06 20:28:37 · answer #3 · answered by Cybeq 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Science, as matter of principle can't dwell on lies, by definition it means knowledge. However many scientist promoting their own misunderstanding do engender a great deal of misleading people ignorant of real science.
Basically arrogance and egotism are the father of lies, and many scientists suffer from this, as do many religionists, myself included, this is something in constant need of supervision, and contestation by others to improve everyone's capability to comprehend, and speak only truly.
What science claims is limited by the limits of the scientists, which are not always perfect even in small things.
2007-03-08 19:47:10 · answer #4 · answered by Gravitar or not... 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Two basic assumptions
First that there is a straight-line relationship between cause and effect. Both cause and effect being two different events, there ought to be an original cause that was not caused and there ought to be an ultimate effect that would not cause another. That contradicts the assumption of straight-line relationship.
Second that extrapolation is logical. Essentially, extrapolation is limited by empirical and experiential evidence. For instance, there is no guarantee that the laws of physics as we unearth over here on the earth are uniform over the entire universe.
But above all, the greatest folly of science is to look for definite answers in this colossus of uncertainties that time characterizes.
You are welcome to e-mail me if I have not been able to express well enough.
2007-03-06 21:09:37 · answer #5 · answered by small 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There are no lies science dwells on. Science has not clarified everything, how could it, and theories are at times modified and reinterpreted, but there are no lies in science. I think you're superreligious.
2007-03-06 20:39:46 · answer #6 · answered by Stephen Dedalus 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Some dolts think that theories are science. For example, most dolts think that man-made global warming is a scientific fact. Most scientists in most major universities disagree with what AlGore propagandizes as fact.
Also Darwin's "survival of the fittest" theory. If it were true, there would be no liberals.
2007-03-06 20:34:41 · answer #7 · answered by nightsongs 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
absolutely none! science is defined as truth!
2007-03-10 20:04:33 · answer #8 · answered by ONEMIND 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Umm, I am guessing you are uber religious.
2007-03-06 20:30:58 · answer #9 · answered by crashedata 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
global warming is a good start. second hand smoke is another.
2007-03-06 20:35:10 · answer #10 · answered by Sheriff of Yahoo! 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋