@Caledonian: If it is an old and trivial insight, why do most scientists and near all non-scientists ignore it?
As Eli said in his post, there is a difference between saying the words and knowing, on a gut level, what it means—only then have you truly incorporated the knowledge and it will aid you in your quest to understand the world.
Also, you say:
Caledonian:
but from your personal tendency to treat the method as a revelation that people have an emotional investment in
Of course people have an emotional investment in this stuff!! Do not make the old mistake of confusing rationality with not being emotional (I guess Star Trek with Mr. Spock is guilty of that, at least for our generation)
And what could be more emotional than dumping the legends of your tribe/parents/priests/elders?
@Caledonian: If it is an old and trivial insight, why do most scientists and near all non-scientists ignore it?
As Eli said in his post, there is a difference between saying the words and knowing, on a gut level, what it means—only then have you truly incorporated the knowledge and it will aid you in your quest to understand the world.
Also, you say: Caledonian: but from your personal tendency to treat the method as a revelation that people have an emotional investment in
Of course people have an emotional investment in this stuff!! Do not make the old mistake of confusing rationality with not being emotional (I guess Star Trek with Mr. Spock is guilty of that, at least for our generation)
And what could be more emotional than dumping the legends of your tribe/parents/priests/elders?
For rationality and emotion in science, read for instance here: The Passionate Scientist: Emotion in Scientific Cognition Paul Thagard http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/Articles/Pages/passionate.html