>>будучи последовательными сциентистами мы таки да, должны были бы отказаться считать историческое знание знанием
Ерунда какая-то. Как будто мы не можем получить новые данные о событиях прошлого (из археологии и документов), которые бы опровергли сложившиеся представления. Как будто этого никогда не происходит.
Вот что пишет "сцентист", каких мало: "It is time we conceded a basic fact of human discourse: either a person has good reasons for what he believes, or he does not. When a person has good reasons, his beliefs contribute to our growing understanding of the world. We need not distinguish between "hard" and "soft" science here, or between science and other evidence-based disciplines like history. There happen to be very good reasons to believe that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. Consequently, the idea that the Egyptians actually did it lacks credibility. Every sane human being recognizes that to rely merely upon "faith" to decide specific questions of historical fact would be both idiotic and grotesque
( ... )
Ерунда какая-то. Как будто мы не можем получить новые данные о событиях прошлого (из археологии и документов), которые бы опровергли сложившиеся представления. Как будто этого никогда не происходит.
Вот что пишет "сцентист", каких мало:
"It is time we conceded a basic fact of human discourse: either a person has good reasons for what he believes, or he does not. When a person has good reasons, his beliefs contribute to our growing understanding of the world. We need not distinguish between "hard" and "soft" science here, or between science and other evidence-based disciplines like history. There happen to be very good reasons to believe that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. Consequently, the idea that the Egyptians actually did it lacks credibility. Every sane human being recognizes that to rely merely upon "faith" to decide specific questions of historical fact would be both idiotic and grotesque ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment