Quotes About Empirical

THE FOLLOWING ARGUMENT is intended to be an exercise in sociological theory. Specifically, it seeks to apply a general theoretical perspective derived from the sociology of knowledge to the phenomenon of religion. While at certain points the argument moves on levels of considerable abstraction, it never leaves (at least not intentionally) the frame of reference of the empirical discipline of sociology.

Religion legitimates so effectively because it relates the precarious reality constructions of empirical societies with the ultimate reality.

Giovanni Sartori has distinguished two approaches to problem solving: the empirical and the rational. 15 The empirical approach is concerned with what is and what can be seen and touched, proceeding on the basis of testing and retesting and largely rejecting dogma and abstract or coherent grand designs for change. The rationalist approach, by contrast, is concerned with abstraction rather than facts, stressing the need for deductive consistency and tending to be dogmatic and definitive.

we must simply develop our spiritual potential in order to escape the chaos of a purely empirical relationship with the universe.

Aristotle made much of observation and strict classification of data in his studies. For this reason he is often considered as the father of empirical science and scientific method.

Empirical debunking cannot reach the deepest fear of the reactionary mind, which is that the state - that devouring leviathan - will soon swallow up all traces of human volition and dignity. The conclusion is based on conservative moral convictions that reason can't shake.

And this, this, is their genius. Conservatives are not looking to make education more rigorous and informative, or science more empirical or verifiable, or voting more representative, or the government more efficient or effective. They just want all those things to reinforce their partisan, ideological, conservative viewpoint.

We have no room for the mystical in science

Observation is a passive science, experimentation an active science.

Either data supports the observations or they don't. Voting doesn't work in science.

Empirical science is apt to cloud the sight, and by the very knowledge of functions and processes to bereave the student of the manly contemplation of the whole. The savant becomes unpoetic.

A worldview tested by truth will inform imagination and meditation, not the other way around. That is why the rigorous way of testing truth has always been through logical consistency, empirical adequacy, and experiential relevance.

We have no empirical evidence of something emerging without a cause from absolute nothing.

Science is defined in various ways, but today it is generally restricted to something which is experimental, which is repeatable, which can be predicted, and which is falsifiable.

I don't think there's an interesting boundary between philosophy and science. Science is totally beholden to philosophy. There are philosophical assumptions in science and there's no way to get around that.

But empirically I've come to understand that my photographs really don't do any harm.

If you're a physicist, for heaven's sake, and here is the experiment, and you have a theory, and the theory doesn't agree with the experiment, then you have to cut out the theory. You were wrong with the theory.

I'm wary of artistic directors who say, 'Here is my vision', because it's empirical. Basically it's about who you work with and what plays you put on; the vision comes out of that.

If you believe in science, like I do, you believe that there are certain laws that are always obeyed.

Science operates in the natural, not the supernatural. In fact, I go so far as to state that there is no such thing as the supernatural or the paranormal.

Philip Kitcher thinks that mathematics is surprisingly like empirical science. Few mathematicians would agree; philosophers too, from Socrates on, have held the opposite opinion.

A scientific theorum has not been - cannot be - proved in the way a mathematical theorem is proved.

science cannot even make probability judgements on

There's science and there's science, is all I'm saying. Where humans are the subjects, it's mostly not science