Originally Posted by Fat Elvis
I completely understand what it means, and I believe I understand what you think it means. I don't think you understand my criticism of what you purport it means. You've turned "science" into something so overly broad to the point to where it has seemingly lost all substantive meaning.
I'm not "anti-science."
We're just going to have to disagree on this.
But science is overly broad by its very nature. That's not a negative at all.
You started this by saying the wheel and written language weren't science, and they were before the time of science. Like "Science" was late to the game. But that's completely false. If you understood, you would realize that both of those things were created according to the very definition of science. Just because science covers an insanely wide range of different uses, that doesn't mean it has lost any substantive meaning at all. Why on Earth would you think that? Science has branched out and diversified and evolved in countless ways. But at its roots, it's still just observation, documentation, and explanation of the world around us.
I don't see any other less broad ways to define it in which it would still retain its root meaning.
Why is it that you would think the invention of the wheel is not something scientific? How would you explain it?