Re: MD Nose tweaking is such fun

[RISKYBIZ9]

ROG AGREES WITH JON ON LIMITATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY JON: Its all about faith. The harmony of a particular belief. Pirsig is concerned that we let science tell us, in effect, what it's OK to have faith in (gravity, time, etc). And since science has been so spectacularly successful over the years, we don't question the heart of science, namely the sci-method, very much. Morality has no objective reality according to science, but thankfully many people still believe in it anyway! ROG: Interesting observations.  Thanks for sharing them.  I will re-enforce your point that of course non-objective reality exists, as it is specifically outside the domain of science.  How can something that is specifically and carefully excluded not exist?  You are also right that it is amusing how some extremists jump from science's suspicion of non-objective knowledge and turn it into a wholesale rejection of non-objective knowledge.   BTW, I don't think that the problem is so much with scientific methodology, as much as it is with overly-simplistic paradigms that people have based on the unstated assumptions of science that are then misapplied outside of non-objective realms (I use "objective" as publicly verifiable.)   I did a list a few weaks ago spelling out all the limitations of science.   There is no problem in practicing science, the problem comes from MISAPPLYING science to assume it says more than it really does. Rog