"Patrick Reany" wrote in message om...
If science education had done its job right, you'd all be able to
correctly define the following terms: (physical) theory, (physical)
law, (physical) hypothesis, (physical) model, scientific method. So,
those of you that are so smug that you KNOW what the hell science is
really all about can define these terms for us here and now.

I can not remember one time in any class I've taken in science and
even in physics (I took the entire undergraduate core of physics
classes at a major university) in which any of these terms were
defined clearly, if they were defined at all! If your experience was
different, let us know what are those definitions you read. Please
give the references too.

In my first year at the university we had a philosophy course
which focused on both the history and on the philosophy of
science. All the science students at our university got this same
course. It was given by the most interesting man I ever met:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22et...%22&lr=lang_en
(search restricted to articles in English).
It was no doubt also the most interesting course I ever had,
and knowing your standards, I'm sure you would feel the same.
After that, no science professor ever had to explain anything
anymore about the terms you listed in your post: we knew all
about it.
So I guess we were very lucky.

But anyway, "If science education had done its job right,"
.... then i.m.o. this place would still have the same number
of crackpots, kooks, trolls and morons. I think this is more
related to how this lot was -if at all- educated by their
parents at a much younger age... educated to become the
kind of people who, for the rest of their lives, resent being
educated any further.

Dirk Vdm