5 ms·
Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
by unanswered 5y ago
Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
- 3pt14159 5y agoIt's not? For example, "Did a nuclear power plant meltdown in Kansas yesterday?" We use science for all sorts of stuff like that.
- julienchastang 5y agoDo you care to elaborate? For example, it was science ex post facto that established Luc Montagnier and not Robert Gallo was the first to isolate HIV [0]. Interestingly, Luc Montagnier has a role in the lab origin theory of SARS-CoV-2. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier
- unanswered 5y ago> Do you care to elaborate? Not really because my viewpoint is not permitted on HN. Further discussion will likely draw moderator attention.
- samatman 5y agoStrikes me that "radiocarbon dating" is the only thing which need be said to robustly disprove this.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Zenst 5y ago> Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question. But it is used to validate, and without validation you would not have history, only opinions.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question. Historical questions are questions of material fact, science is an appropriate epistemic tool to answer questions of material fact, and, so, I disagree. Some historical questions may not be convenient to investigate scientifically given available tools, but that's a different issue.