>Physics cannot even predict that the sun will come up tomorrow. I grant your
>point. It is true that bricklayers do not use physics to explain bricks
>before laying them. However, when we use the word "science" then we have to
>be careful. I do not believe that political science is a science, for
>instance. The mere use of mathematical and/or physical jargons does not make
>something a science. Physicists are doubting their ability to find a truly
>fundamental description of all physical phenomena--a purely reductionist
>point of view. If physics is not the prototype of science, then what is the
>best example of it? You tell me!
I have a friend who is chairman of a Computer Science Department. He says
any discipline that has to add the name 'science' to its name is not science.
Art
http://biology.swau.edu