Talk:Homeopathic proving

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Homeopathy WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Homeopathy. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

I added a sentence to the last paragraph mentioning placebo effect. rmosler 08:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ironic

Perhaps something was lost in translation from the German. The empirical sciences do not deal in proofs of natural phenomenon. We validate and verify, but proof is the realm of the abstract.

"... in science there is no 'knowledge', in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth. ... This view means, furthermore, that we have no proofs in science (excepting, of course, pure mathematics and logic). In the empirical sciences, which alone can furnish us with information about the world we live in, proofs do not occur, if we mean by 'proof' an argument which establishes once and for ever the truth of a theory." from Sir Karl Popper, The Problem of Induction, 1953

"It is the aim of science to establish general rules which determine the reciprocal connection of objects and events in time and space. For these rules, or laws of nature, absolutely general validity is required — not proven." from Albert Einstein, in Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, 1941.

-- Paleorthid 21:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)