Social schollars preach that there is no interpretation of laws or fully grounded explanations in science in the sense that they be flowless, layman level stimulating.
But..
Some counter arguments exist to re-examine these schollars' views about physical science's so called (perceived) lowly cognitive skills/concepts
**it took 2500 years since start of scientific thinking to **Describe** acceleration phenom
** Nobel prices are given for **explanation** of missing links in theories or statements or facts about the work
These concepts/skills are being funded with billions to be revealed. There must be something wrong in putting billions to lowly cognitive discoveries, i believe
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers
More Philippos Afxentiou's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions