So, following my exciting Harry Potter filled morning on Friday, I attended "Nous" the Philosophy club at Weber State University. Considering how both of my sisters, Rachel and Brooke, are Philosophy majors - I had heard much about the topic and was able to comprehend much of the debate. The topic Friday evening was "The Objectivity of Science" Dr. Dan Schroeder from the physics department spoke about how scientific truths are objective rather than subjective. He argued his position by refuting the claims of Kuhn - a contemporary relativist philosopher of science. I however felt that he did a very poor job. I felt like he missed the issue - I think that he should have spent his time refuting the claims of indirect or representative realists or idealists like Berkeley or Locke. The only way to successfully argue for the subjectivity of physical truths is to embrace these indirect realists or idealist veiws - in other words, to claim that either we cannot preceive the outside world - or there is no physical world. I dont think that Kuhn embraces either of these views so I dont think his argument was relevent. He perhaps on some level embraces Idealism, but this is not the point that Dr. Schroeder attacked. He rather attacked the claim that there are certain levels of truth in Aristotlelian, Newtonian, (is that a word) and Einstienien physics. This I felt was irrelevent. He addressed one concept in particular - the Theory of gravity He stated that he thinks that the theories get truer with every revolution - a point terribly attacked by both Professor Greene and Professor Fudge.

Well at any rate - just stating my opinion.

I loved GOF, I will probably post a review sometime.

Tootles
BEAK