Ooops. That should have been, "...constitutes science, scientific practice, and who are considered scientists are just..." And it's only Tuesday. On 10/17/06, Casey O'Donnell <odonnc@rpi.edu> wrote:
I don't think Jeremy is interested in "flaming" anyone, just pointing out that what constitutes science, scientific practice, and scientific practice (the actions of scientists) are just as open to inquiry in this conversation.
Coming from a "Science Studies" program, he (and I) ought to know and point this out. Hence why interdisciplinary spaces like this are useful. We bring our understandings to bear on common questions/problems. That is all he was attempting to do I believe.
Cheers. Casey
On 10/17/06, Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns@vt.edu> wrote:
yes, that is why there are many dictionaries... and you know what... there are encyclopedias, textbooks, and even a whole field of study:) i don't see many in science citing webster's dictionary as the canonical definition, but perhaps they should be...
You'll have to take that up with the writers at Webster's Dictionary.