Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Happy Birthday: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,137 Year: 5,394/9,624 Month: 419/323 Week: 59/204 Day: 1/34 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Hello everyone, and my senior paper
Member (Idle past 108 days)
Posts: 75
From: Fox River Grove, IL
Joined: 05-29-2010

Message 70 of 70 (693295)
03-13-2013 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by KevinAthans
03-07-2013 11:22 AM

Science vs. Science History: Which is 'Better'? (?)
Hi Kevin!
Your idea for a paper sounds very interesting. Some replies here already contain good ideas about how you might shape it. I'm anxious to see more discussion along these lines. Unfortunately, some of your statements have led the discussion in the direction of something like, "Science vs. Science History: Which is 'Better'?", which I agree is relevant to your paper, but a very silly question in general ... and you seem to be arguing for the general case.
In the interest of getting on to more interesting and potentially enlightening discussion, would you agree with these statements?:
"Although the history of science can be helpful for understanding scientific concepts, it's not required."
"The relative value of technical scientific knowledge, and knowledge of science's history, depend upon what you aim to accomplish with the knowledge."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by KevinAthans, posted 03-07-2013 11:22 AM KevinAthans has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024