scientific procedures may be less interesting than scientific results. One may philosophical account of some feature of science is an accurate report of what is the case speculate about the great questions of theology and philosophy as philosophers and or a persuasive characterization of what ought to be the case. Logical positivists or theologians have always speculated, but one must try to accommodate the results of empiricists often talk about providing "rational reconstruction" of various aspects of science in one's speculations. Of course, if one abandons all attempts at science. It remains an open question, however, whether any particular reconstruction accommodation, then one's philosophy of nature and science will be does what it is supposed to do or merely provides a reasonable but largely fictional indistinguishable from purely speculative metaphysics. /..
Which serves it in the office of a wall, Or as a moat defensive to a house, Against the envy of less happier lands, This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England, This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings, Feared by their breed and famous by their birth . . . (Richard II, II. i. 4052) He got away with it. 5 And by earlier empiricists as well. Blackburn (1984: 172) offers a pungent quote from Hobbes' Leviathan. 6 I owe this observation to Franklin Goldsmith. 7 Here and elsewhere he draws on Tversky (1977). 8 If you want greed, try cats. But no one ever calls someone a cat as a metaphorical way of saying that that person is greedy. 200 Notes A further example is "bastard." I know of no evidence that a male person whose parents were not married when he was born is any more likely to be
annaabi.ee 
