It was a general comment about those in academia rather than the purpose of a PhD. Knowledge does not equate to wisdom.
So you did move the goalposts in a discussion about the purpose of a PhD. And you feel sorry for me for spotting that?
It was a general comment about those in academia rather than the purpose of a PhD. Knowledge does not equate to wisdom.
So you did move the goalposts in a discussion about the purpose of a PhD. And you feel sorry for me for spotting that?
Once again I will state that this is like a Science v Faith debate. The only people who can see both sides are those who hold no beliefs.
You mentioned that you had overseen a few PhD's. That put things in perspective for me, hence the comment. It would have seemed rude to say "That explains a few things......." before the rest of the post.
Is that why science is constantly updated? If it got things right most of the time we would for example not run cars on fossil fuels.I quite agree its a Science v Faith debate with me and others on the Science side and you, david k, tigger and others on the faith side.
The difference between the two is the science has a much much better track record of getting it right.
Yes I am aware of that. My stepdad has supervised a few. Doesn't negate the comment about academia rather widdens it to others with myopic viewpoints.It may surprise you to learn that you don't have to be an academic to supervise a PhD. There are such things as industrial supervisors as well. So sorry your shift of the discussion to a stereotypical ad hominen was a dud.
Yes I am aware of that. My stepdad has supervised a few. Doesn't negate the comment about academia rather widdens it to others with myopic viewpoints.
Is that why science is constantly updated? If it got things right most of the time we would for example not run cars on fossil fuels.
The majority of steps forward in human history have been made by trial and error,not science.
Id call that personal experience.
Science is updated because it learns as it goes along. Faith has no need of learning, it believes what it believes come what may. I bet Harold Camping is still convinced he was right.
PS That second sentence must win Non-Sequitur of the Month.
You also need to look at new technology
This example is of advanced air bag technology being used for cyclists, and as it is in the collar of a jacket or coat would meet the desires of both camps, and also be suitable for everyone including pedestrians and motorists
[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVZ0qiA-jBY&feature=player_embedded[/media]
You also need to look at new technology
Sadly it appears from the illustration that when operated the system also rips the sleeves off your jacket and changes your sex!
You also need to look at new technology
This example is of advanced air bag technology being used for cyclists, and as it is in the collar of a jacket or coat would meet the desires of both camps, and also be suitable for everyone including pedestrians and motorists