[WikiEN-l] Re: SPOV threatens NPOV

Thu Dec 15 16:41:34 UTC 2005

If you'd looked at what I was replying to, maybe my point would have
been more clear to you: "An example of a 'supernatural phenomenon'
which is not 'bunk' would be welcome. :)" I provided one, with an
emphasis that what counts as supernatural and what counts as natural
is not a transhistorical category. But I think my position on all of
this (predicting the future has nothing to do with this) should be
pretty clear from my other posts, so I won't repeat myself.

FF

On 12/15/05, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/15/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> > When Newton originally presented his theory of gravity it was seriously
> > attacked by his contemporaries as being comprised of "occult forces" rather
> > than being a truly mechanistic physics (like Cartesian physics). Now we all
> > know how that worked out in the end -- not only did Newton triumph, but even
> > what science was ended up being redefined in the process. And it has been
> > redefined many times since then, in different ways and different fields --
> > each time something initially incompatible becomes the accepted norm, it
> > changes not only the evidence, but the entire standard of what counts as
> > evidence and even what counts as argumentation. This is a well-documented
> > phenomena, and even the most positivistic of philosophers acknowledge this
>   (phenomenon)
> > to some degree.
>
> What's your point? The goal of Wikipedia is not to predict the future
> but to accurately reflect the present.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>