Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.postmodern,sci.lang,alt.feminism
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!CERN.ch!cms6.cern.ch!potts
From: Anthony Potts <potts@afsmail.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: hard sciences 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960529134352.18688R-100000@wenzel.Mines.EDU> 
X-Sender: potts@cms6.cern.ch
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: cms6.cern.ch
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91c.960603233018.12072J-100000@cms6.cern.ch>
Sender: news@news.cern.ch (USENET News System)
Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics
References: <Drzpuo.HJu@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <Pine.LNX.3.91.960529134352.18688R-100000@wenzel.Mines.EDU> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 21:30:49 GMT
Lines: 16
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:176722 sci.lang:55136



On Wed, 29 May 1996, John Stockwell wrote:

> On Sun, 26 May 1996, David Swanson wrote:
> 
> >  Good results, the consensus has it, in the hard
> > sciences; doubtful ones elsewhere, by most accounts. 
> > 
> > Can you define "hard sciences" without including this criterion?
> 
> Yes. The hard sciences have a consensus, the soft sciences do not.
> 
> > David
> 
It shouldn't be plural. Physics is hard science, anything else is not.
