(October 12, 2013 at 8:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote:(September 28, 2013 at 12:07 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Hands-on experience works too.
But trying things to see what works is a fair equivalent of conducting an experiment. Contrast that with merely reading some silly shit in the goat herder's manual and accepting it as "true".
It appears that you're setting up a false dichotomy there, Min.
For things that are empirically testable, "trying things to see what works", while not strictly science, is utilizing empirical processes, the basis of science. Empiricism has it's limits - and for areas where empiricism cannot go, we use other methods (such as pure reason). No one method stands alone.
Your latter point I would agree with - so-called "revealed knowledge" is no knowledge at all. It has no place in epistemology in my view.