Template talk:Philosophyscience

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This could really use some work... ħumanUser talk:Human 00:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Why is 'a priori' on there but 'a posterior' not when 'a posteriori' corresponds to Empiricism?--CentimeterINCHES 02:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I added it. It seems kind of random that one should be in the template and one shouldn't. By the way, why is this template titled Empiricism? Why is Empiricism more important that Rationalism? Shouldn't it be Empiricism and Rationalism?--CentimeterINCHES 02:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Because it's about empiricism? ħumanUser talk:Human 05:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it matters, it's only on five articles, and I don't think it should be on science at all. Scarlet A.pnggnostic 09:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, we don't have a science/philosophy of science template! Seems awfully strange for a wiki which values science so much. A template focused just on philosophy of science could have empiricism, rationalism, naturalism, materialism, a prior, a posteriori, science, pseudoscience, woo, and who knows what else! Perhaps, in lieu of a science template, we should rename this template???--CentimeterINCHES 16:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I hate the title, but, well, templates have weird titles sometimes. ħumanUser talk:Human 10:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Make it the same as the other nav templates[edit]

Any reason not to change it? FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 02:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

*cough* Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 22:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)