Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Astronomy is a science — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The objection that the poverty of the stimulus argument fails to prove UG is innately known is not a legitimate complaint

    Astronomy is a science

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Since antiquity, astronomy has been a puzzle-solving activity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Puzzle-solving activities are sciences
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When an astronomer's prediction failed, it constituted a puzzle the astronomer could hope to solve through more measurements or theoretical adjustments
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Karl Popper argued that a discipline qualifies as science only if its claims are falsifiable through controlled experimentation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Astronomy is an observational discipline that cannot manipulate its subject matter or conduct controlled experiments on celestial bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, astronomy fails Popper's demarcation criterion and occupies an epistemically ambiguous status between science and natural history.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Puzzle-solving capacity is a necessary but insufficient criterion for scientific status, as astrology and numerology historically generated their own puzzles and ad hoc solutions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kuhn's own analysis in 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' reveals that puzzle-solving characterizes normal science within a paradigm, not the legitimacy of the paradigm itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Astronomy is an observational discipline that cannot manipulate its subject matt...Karl Popper argued that a discipline qualifies as science only if its claims are...Kuhn's own analysis in 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' reveals that pu...Puzzle-solving activities are sciences
    +4 moreShow less
    Puzzle-solving capacity is a necessary but insufficient criterion for scientific...Since antiquity, astronomy has been a puzzle-solving activityTherefore, astronomy fails Popper's demarcation criterion and occupies an episte...When an astronomer's prediction failed, it constituted a puzzle the astronomer c...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: pseudo-science
    View source passageHide passage
    Kuhn’s view of demarcation is most clearly expressed in his comparison of astronomy with astrology. Since antiquity, astronomy has been a puzzle-solving activity and therefore a science. If an astronomer’s prediction failed, then this was a puzzle that he could hope to solve for instance with more measurements or adjustments of the theory. In contrast, the astrologer had no such puzzles since in that discipline “particular failures did not give rise to research puzzles, for no man, however skill
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit