tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post3081847418734581616..comments2023-12-13T23:36:17.126-05:00Comments on Philosophy, lit, etc.: 'Scientism' 12 - James, Dewey & Muellerpraymonthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09799593980838361293noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post-50530639304477684082015-02-07T18:01:24.409-05:002015-02-07T18:01:24.409-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Badlapurhttp://freeonlinemovies.me/badlapu-2015-full-movie-varun-dhawan/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post-36247226285590919282015-01-23T14:12:55.235-05:002015-01-23T14:12:55.235-05:00Perhaps. James certainly respected scientific meth...Perhaps. James certainly respected scientific method and pursued it in some of his own work. However, he also argued against W. K. Clifford (in 'The Will to Believe'), contending that in some domains one is entitled to form a belief (in fact, can't avoid doing so) in the absence of sufficient evidence of the sort that scientists might seek.praymonthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09799593980838361293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5294547523454259081.post-85077817088287831612015-01-22T12:17:33.138-05:002015-01-22T12:17:33.138-05:00if James was indeed a monist, and I think he was, ...if James was indeed a monist, and I think he was, than doesn't this lend itself to a kind of scientific worldview? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com