How do we know that the rules of procedure that science adopts are in fact the right ones?
There is this whole post-modernist argument that comes in here. They think of science as authoritarian while I think of science as being fundamentally liberating and democratic. If somebody says that a Dalit is not human being. Why is that not a scientific proposition? There are criteria, and there are inter subjective criteria on which all of us agree. When Hitler propounded his theory of a superior race, there was some criteria on the basis of which enlightened humanity rejected it. I would say that the assertion that all propositions have equality of status is nonsense. Just as Gramsci said that all of us are philosophers without knowing it all of us are scientists without knowing it. In our daily life we all the time make cause-effect relations and apply certain criteria to distinguish between propositions which we believe to be true and propositions which we believe to be false. The scientists in fact bring these criteria into some kind of explicit existence we are doing this impl
Related Questions
- Whether suitable rules to lay down specific procedure for ascertaining/verification of the fact of an event of birth/death under section 13 (3) of the RBD Act, 1969 can be made in the state rules?
- How do we know that the rules of procedure that science adopts are in fact the right ones?
- What are the rules and procedure for cancellation of KSRTC Bus Reservation tickets?
