Science and beliefs (was: the gods)

[Dominique.Thillaud]

At 12:41 +0200 29/05/97, Peter Moore wrote:
>I am afraid there is a confusion here.  Some scientists may *think*
>that science involves or can deliver a world-view, but in fact this
>is incompatible with the nature of science, which is an endlessly
>corrigible process of questioning and enquiry, whose progress in
>the accumulation of knowledge and framing of new hypotheses is bought
>at the cost of never getting stuck within a particular view of
>things.

	confusion ? I don't believe.
	I'm afraid you develop here an 'integrist' epistemological vision
of the science where the science is out of mankind and had a 'nature' (?).
	Science, as languages, is an human, sociological and ideological
product. Without 'nature' but with 'functions'.
	One of them is to give us a structured and pragmatic world-view.
	And the 'endlessly ...' is effective only on the long duration.
Science don't change continuously and not faster than languages or
religions.
	But many scientist who extract power and notoriety from science
like to persuade you they are uninteressed and ideological-free. Sorry, but
that's not true.
	Regards,
Dominique

	P.S.: And don't forget an other function: to give war-power
(military and economical). Recall Archimedes and Sicilia, Galileus and
Venice, Einstein and USA. Ask you: 'who pays ?' and 'why ?'. Even the
development of medicine is linked to war: chirurgy and asepsy were first
for wounded soldiers. If you wont Tamil to be teached in USA, propose a
plan to invade Tamil Nadu with GIs or pop-corn.

Dominique THILLAUD
Universite' de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, France