While certainly "(t)here are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio/ Than are dreamt of in your philosophy," I'd also be careful of falling into the trap that there's nothing we can't comprehend, and no decision that can't be reduced to measurable metrics, as long as we just apply enough science to it.
His general point, that some things are not a valid tool to use science on, appears correct to me. I'd be terrified of a society that tried to replace what should be moral or philosophic decisions with quantifiable equations, and a lot of people who think that would be a neat idea often appear to me to be falling into the "I have a hammer, so everything must be a nail" fallacy.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-10-11 12:23 am (UTC)His general point, that some things are not a valid tool to use science on, appears correct to me. I'd be terrified of a society that tried to replace what should be moral or philosophic decisions with quantifiable equations, and a lot of people who think that would be a neat idea often appear to me to be falling into the "I have a hammer, so everything must be a nail" fallacy.