[Corpora-List] Do you think LINGUISTICS is SCIENCE or ARTS?

[Rainer Ottmueller]

> And it is indeed science when one systematically uses a theory to predict some behaviours that are to be validated by observation.
This reminds me to the old joke (really a joke, this time):
How do physicsts prove that every odd number is prime?
3 (check)
5 ( check)
7 (check)
9 is an error in measurement. Etc..

> Linguistics IS SCIENCE OR ART, because Linguistics IS SCIENCE AND ART.
And business, and.....

Rainer


On 24 March 2010 09:19, Gilles Serasset <Gilles.Serasset at imag.fr> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> What I meant in my earlier answer is that the classical question "SCIENCE OR
> ART" is most of the time asked only for political reasons and that it is
> indeed non relevant in general.
>
> Physics, for instance, is always mentionned as the example of what one may
> call REAL science.
>
> And it is indeed science when one systematically uses a theory to predict
> some behaviours that are to be validated by observation. This aspect has
> been clearly stated by P. Fung.
>
> But what about the way a theory is conceived ? Do you really think that the
> theory of relativity was the result of a "systematic pursuit of knowledge" ?
> I do believe that most of this work relies on the pursuit of an "aesthetic"
> result that would reconcile the theory and the "annoying facts".
>
> In this regard, there is ART and SCIENCE in physics.
>
> The same kind of observation holds even in mathematics when the hypotheses
> (a "beautifully" reduced set of assumption) that are admitted by a community
> are destroyed by the discovery of a new paradox. The hypothesis are a
> product of ART, there failure is a product of SCIENCE.
>
> And I do believe that there is no way it could be another way, because even
> scientists are human and whichever definition you give to "humanity" it will
> not only involve the concepts of 'rigor', 'honesty', 'systematicity', ...
>
> I think that whatever the way you do linguistics (by introspection or with a
> computing device or whatever), the theories, rules and principle you "see"
> in your work are the result of an artistic process. And there will be many
> other linguists that will then argue on your production and try to
> invalidate them systematically (and this is science).
>
> Hence an irrelevant (but logically deduced from the above unscientific
> assumptions) answer to the original question:
>
> Linguistics IS SCIENCE OR ART, because Linguistics IS SCIENCE AND ART.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gilles,
> --
> Gilles Sérasset
> GETALP-LIG                         BP 53 - F-38041 Grenoble Cedex 9
> Phone: +33 4 76 51 43 80                   Fax:   +33 4 76 63 56 86
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora at uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
>

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora