Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!paganini.bofh.team!not-for-mail
From: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The purpose of science
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 16:14:51 -0700
Organization: To protect and to server
Message-ID: <66887E6B.397@ix.netcom.com>
References: <17dea0394e40408e$988$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team; logging-data="3728046"; posting-host="nLYg9UBeoMWa070gP9wQcw.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A";
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.3
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240705-6, 07/05/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:654663

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> 
> It is - right - determining the truth.
> Just not in the way you think. Science
> is setting it, not discovering it.
> 
> We need a good description of the reality.
> Good - means: optimized. Science is solving
> the puzzle of optimized set of axioms and
> definitions. Or rather - axioms including
> its special form - definitions.


if the universe does not have a purpose, why does science thinks it has
a purpose?


-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.