> Get reading in the philosophy of science. Wait, what? You think sociology is science. That means it's you who seeds to find out science's philosophical under

> Get reading in the philosophy of science. Wait, what? You think sociology is science. That means it's you who seeds to find out science's philosophical underpinnings. Science is noteworthy more for what it excludes than for what it includes. The reasons for that are worth learning. > To say there are more ways to understanding than one single method does not equal saying that all ideas are relative. Yes, and I never said or implied it. This is (or was) a discussion of science, not a comparison of science with other ways of apprehending reality. > ... and again an appalling straw man. Yes -- your straw man. You've long since stopped paying attention to my views, happily replacing them with your own.