What's is this sub-forum all about?

[apeiron]

1) Can you give me just one example of empirical evidence that does not require reasoned argument?

I wouldn't expect so. Science is modelling so must depend on metaphysical concepts and formal descriptions of causal relationships. That is what models are made of.

The diffence is science is reasoned argument that demands empirical test, while philosophy - among other things - is about seeing how far you can get with just rational tests of an argument.

So, when you are just doing physics?

I would say when you are simply applying a theory rather than thinking about how something else might be a deeper view.

It's the difference between forging a tool and using a tool.

 

[formal]

1) I wouldn't expect so.
2) science is reasoned argument that demands empirical test,
while philosophy - among other things - is about seeing how far you can get with just rational tests of an argument.
3) I would say when you are simply applying a theory
4) It's the difference between forging a tool and using a tool.

1) that is equivalent to saying "you are right, I cannot produce one single example, but I am not prepared to admit it"
2),3) you are ,sorry but, again saying "I was wrong but I would climb a mirror before I admit it. In the bolded text you are admitting it, (unconsciously, I hope.):
you MUST always do metaphysics, before doing what you consider (right or wrong) physics.

(hope #4 is superfluous)

 

[apeiron]

1) that is equivalent to saying "you are right, I cannot produce one single example, but I am not prepared to admit it"
2),3) you are ,sorry but, again saying "I was wrong but I would climb a mirror before I admit it. In the bolded text you are admitting it, (unconsciously, I hope.):
you MUST always do metaphysics, before doing what you consider (right or wrong) physics.

(hope #4 is superfluous)

You seem a little hard of understanding here.

Of course the ideas must ground the impressions. And the impressions in turn build the ideas.

You appear to want to frame this as an either/or situation, whereas I have stressed that reasoned argument and empirical observation are the naturally complementary components of any modelling, of any attempt to know reality.

 

[Evo]

formal is the banned crackpot simpatico.