Lyla Byrne wrote:If you are

I didn't 'just say'.DJP posted a link to a site which argued 'observation, then theory', so I posted a quote from Einstein 'theory, then observation'.DJP hasn't come back on this, to say whether they still agree with outdated induction (observe data, then form theory), or would like further discussion on Einstein's method (which is backed up by philosophers of science, like Lakatos).

That's fine, but you'll have to specify which ideology it is that you're using. Unless, that is, you're going to argue that you don't employ an ideology, which most people will know is a standard component of conservative ideology (that is, to deny it is an ideology). Perhaps you're not a conservative, but then you can explain which ideology it is that you use. We need to know this in an ideological debate about 'science'.I'm open about my ideological influences – Marx, Dietzgen, Pannekoek, Lakatos, Schaff, to name a few. But others are not so keen to expose their influences, especially regarding the philosophy of science. Most make do with bourgeois 'common sense'.

That's a shame, but I understand.