You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.

Latest

Greatest

Lobby

Journals

Options

Help

Reply #23: Which only further supports my point. [View All]

Printer-friendly format

Email this thread to a friend

Bookmark this thread

This topic is archived.

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology

darkstar3

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-05-10 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #17

23. Which only further supports my point.

Edited on Wed May-05-10 08:41 AM by darkstar3

An epistemology developed in the 1930's cannot be the basis for a method that is many centuries old. It was formally ensconced in scientific circles beginning in the 12th and 13th centuries, which led to what it is today, but you are correct that the ancient Egyptians and other cultures showed the sparks of the Scientific Method. So, if you'd like to say I'm wrong, show me how this incredibly old method can somehow be based on logical positivism, which wasn't fleshed out until the early 20th century.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate

About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.