Was there a repeatable empirical test conducted to prove that the results of science are true? In which journal were the results published?
Or is it just that results found through scientific means have proved internally consistent and extremely useful, leading us to define "true" as "internally consistent and extremely useful"?
Is there a scientific (empirical repeatable) test to show that this definition is the best one? Or is it our philosophical commitment that internally consistent and extremely useful results are what we'll call "true"?
Or is it just that results found through scientific means have proved internally consistent and extremely useful, leading us to define "true" as "internally consistent and extremely useful"?
Is there a scientific (empirical repeatable) test to show that this definition is the best one? Or is it our philosophical commitment that internally consistent and extremely useful results are what we'll call "true"?