Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 5083406" data-attributes="member: 2303">To me, this is the difference between a scientist and an engineer. The engineer wants results, and cares about philosophy only to the point where it affects the result. To an engineer, this discussion is hogwash. The scientists wants truths, and finds a discussion about the nature of what truth is interesting. To a scientist, this discussion is at the very least interesting as a phenomenon, regardless of the views expressed in the discussion.These are generalizations that have little to do with individual engineers or scientists, obviously. We all have a little of each in us.In any discussion, you can always come in and say that the very basis of the discussion is a moot point and uninteresting. This is rarely an interesting and productive viewpoint. As long as the discussion continues, it is self-evident that some people find it interesting, and that is all the reason needed to discuss things.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Starfox, post: 5083406, member: 2303"] To me, this is the difference between a scientist and an engineer. The engineer wants results, and cares about philosophy only to the point where it affects the result. To an engineer, this discussion is hogwash. The scientists wants truths, and finds a discussion about the nature of what truth is interesting. To a scientist, this discussion is at the very least interesting as a phenomenon, regardless of the views expressed in the discussion. These are generalizations that have little to do with individual engineers or scientists, obviously. We all have a little of each in us. In any discussion, you can always come in and say that the very basis of the discussion is a moot point and uninteresting. This is rarely an interesting and productive viewpoint. As long as the discussion continues, it is self-evident that some people find it interesting, and that is all the reason needed to discuss things. [/QUOTE]

Verification