68.186.88.59
In Reply to: RE: Do they have even slightest idea what "empirical" means? posted by carcass93 on July 04, 2008 at 12:35:42
The definition taken in entirety unless otherwise noted from a real (not online) dictionary and the one considered most authoritative, The Compact Edition (small, not abridged)of the Oxford English Dictionary: Complete Text Reproduced Micrographically (Eighth printing).
"Empirical (Pronunciation and alternate spelling removed)
1. Med a. Of a physician: That bases his methods of practice on the results of observation and experiment, not on scientific theory. b. Of a remedy, a rule of treatment, etc: That is adopted because found (or believed) to have been successful in practice, the reason of its efficacy being unknown.
(Example phrases removed)
2. That practices physic or surgery without scientific knowledge: that is guilty of quackery. Also of medicines: That is of the nature of a quack nostrum.
(Example phrases removed)
3. In matters of arts or practice: That is guided by mere experience, without scientific knowledge; also of methods, expedients, etc. Often in opprobrious sense transf. from 2: Ignorantly presumptuous, resembling, or characteristic of, a charlatan.
(Example phrases removed.)"
What of "Empirically"?
"1. After the manner of an empiric or quack-doctor."
What of "Empiricism"?
"1. Med Practice founded upon experiment and observation; ignorant and unscientific practice; quackery."
It would appear that you are right: "Subjectivists" are empirical.
I don't understand why you insist on being constantly abusive, aggressive and derogatory of "objectivists" for here is an example where I'm pretty sure that most "objectivists" would whole-heartedly agree with you.
Follow Ups: