Friday, October 26, 2012
Whilst he errs with the use of intuition, myths and the lack of evidence, Thales upholds reason. With Strato, he finds no intent behind Nature. He holds forth for self-motion, which I interprest as inherent motion, which Lamberth's argument from inherency upholds that chaos, order, regularity and the descriptions- laws- of Nature inhere in Nature so that the Cosmos and its parts need no divine director!
When intuitions base themselves on previous evidence, they can indeed do but otherwise they are just guesses. Myths are faulty animistic explanations. And evidence must ever uphold theories and such.
Thales made significant scientific discoveries, yet his adovcacy of excluding the superstitious divine intent make him wiser than Aristotle in that aspect.
Have you anything to add to this?
When intuitions base themselves on previous evidence, they can indeed do but otherwise they are just guesses. Myths are faulty animistic explanations. And evidence must ever uphold theories and such.
Thales made significant scientific discoveries, yet his adovcacy of excluding the superstitious divine intent make him wiser than Aristotle in that aspect.
Have you anything to add to this?
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Sunday, October 7, 2012
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)