What the Americans call Science is not Science.

[TheVisionofEr]

Americans call the production of economically viable inventions produced largely in the research universities Science. However, this is the production of Artifacts or things for the market, And not a science at all.

On a higher level of analysis, or a more subtle one, what the Americans call Science is no Science because it does not produce knowledge. It produces working assumptions which when they are more believed in become theories or laws. These laws are never knowledge as such, but rather they are rules to be measured by their practical (their results amidst the pragma or things of human life) results. Thus, what the Americans call science has no part of knowledge in the highest sense, and is an art (taken in the general sense of something learned and teachable).

[RCSaunders]

Americans call the production of economically viable inventions produced largely in the research universities Science. However, this is the production of Artifacts or things for the market, And not a science at all.

Are you from a country where diptheria, small pox, polio, scarlet fever, tetanus, yellow fever, and typhus regularly kill people? Her in the wicked west, those nasty non-science market artifacts (vaccines and antibiotics) have cured those diseases.

[Scott Mayers]

Americans call the production of economically viable inventions produced largely in the research universities Science. However, this is the production of Artifacts or things for the market, And not a science at all.

On a higher level of analysis, or a more subtle one, what the Americans call Science is no Science because it does not produce knowledge. It produces working assumptions which when they are more believed in become theories or laws. These laws are never knowledge as such, but rather they are rules to be measured by their practical (their results amidst the pragma or things of human life) results. Thus, what the Americans call science has no part of knowledge in the highest sense, and is an art (taken in the general sense of something learned and teachable).

Universities teach. They often have affliated research facilities of which many are not necessarily of the university but of private investers. That tech is distinctly separate from the university but they often grant access to students for practical training etc. Though this may not be 'universal' across all Universiites, this is how they operate in general. Also, other interests invest into the university, like the local city, for instance, that might treat the University hospital as an extended part of the health system.

The education function is all that the main part of universities serve significantly and many specialize or have alternative ways to teach with different particular courses.

I'm not sure what you are speaking against the institute on. While it certainly has flaws and tends not to be able to serve all people's means of learning, it still is an essential part of society.

If you learn differently, that doesn't mean that how you learn is less significant. There are many snobs or ignorant students who would dismiss you but many in these institutes would not in principle but just in practice, given they are also 'businesses', even if many are 'non-profit'.

[nothing]

Americans call the production of economically viable inventions produced largely in the research universities Science. However, this is the production of Artifacts or things for the market, And not a science at all.

On a higher level of analysis, or a more subtle one, what the Americans call Science is no Science because it does not produce knowledge. It produces working assumptions which when they are more believed in become theories or laws. These laws are never knowledge as such, but rather they are rules to be measured by their practical (their results amidst the pragma or things of human life) results. Thus, what the Americans call science has no part of knowledge in the highest sense, and is an art (taken in the general sense of something learned and teachable).

More true than not.

Western science(s) no longer produce knowledge, but part of this problem is due to warfare from other belief-based ideologies
who intentionally pervert Western sciences in attempts to make their own without-knowledge ideology look superior. Problem: it isn't.

[TheVisionofEr]

Americans call the production of economically viable inventions produced largely in the research universities Science. However, this is the production of Artifacts or things for the market, And not a science at all.

Are you from a country where diptheria, small pox, polio, scarlet fever, tetanus, yellow fever, and typhus regularly kill people? Her in the wicked west, those nasty non-science market artifacts (vaccines and antibiotics) have cured those diseases.

This simply has nothing to do with the motive of the post. It might be interesting in a political forum where emotional manipulation and policy come into question as a matter of necessity.

The issue isn’t whether invention or science cures something. And that therefore in crude political polemic aimed at a popular understanding one can suggest that it is good (by a low rhetorical omission of an analysis of the evils issuing to human beings from science or invention). Rather, the issue is whether it is science (through asking what the origin of science is), and what, correspondingly, knowledge as such is.

[TheVisionofEr]

If you learn differently, that doesn't mean that how you learn is less significant.

Read the post again without the completely faulty assumption that it has a political motive.

The motive of the post is the question: What is science?, and correspondingly, where is its origin, and what is knowledge? The de facto meaning of Science in America is linked to the universities, which have the purpose of supplying carers to the young and to produce marketable research. Nobody sends their kids to the university in the hope that one day they will be asked, how did you come up with it, as Newton was asked after his famous work on the calculus was reviewed by his colleagues at Cambridge, and answered, For the last twenty years I did nothing but think about the nature of the universe.

[TheVisionofEr]

Western science(s) no longer produce knowledge, but part of this problem is due to warfare from other belief-based ideologies
who intentionally pervert Western sciences in attempts to make their own without-knowledge ideology look superior. Problem: it isn't.

This is unspoiled by tangible examples.