I would suggest that "The Scientific Method" is just as ethnocentric (that's not the right word for it, really) as Philosophy. Heck, "The Scientific Method" IS a philosophy, in and of itself.
I'd also suggest that there is no such thing as "extending understanding". As Science creates new understanding, it simultaneously destroys old understanding, which is then forgotten.
The problem with the dialectic, is that the winner just has the best argument, they are not necessarily "right". I'd be willing to bet money, though, that each and every person who serves as a Social Service Provider, does so for purely selfish reasons. I know that I do, though sometimes it's fun to get on the pedestal and put on the robe and crown....
This gets back to the original argument, which if I understand it correctly was "Why waste our time on that worthless Philosophy crap, when we can do real things like test more tangible things, like guns and tactics."
To which I STILL answer: In order to get to where you can do "real" things, it helps to HAVE a philosophy, (which you do, whether you admit it or not) and to recognize what that philosophy is. Otherwise, you're doomed to revert to "evil". (For lack of a better word. "Sin" is a good word for it as well, but religious connotations have wasted it's utility)
Bookmarks