The underpinning is that a ’fact’ is a name, a moniker, a logic misnomer... for a highly predicable theory. But it remains theory.
The use of the word 'law' in science is also an attempt to put social and cultural group pressure on individuals to conform or be punished by the group. At least this is part of the traditional meaning of the use of the word law. Thus we can see the the word law remains as being in the world of human social/cultural structure and in the supposed world of logic, has zero place in the world of science.
So we can have the word law in the world of science, if we are looking to prosecute people and possibly kill, ostracize or beat them to death, in public, for 'violating' laws. Which, according to the tenants of science, is patently absurd and against the very fabric of science and what it is supposed to stand for.
But the word works very well in religion. Is science with laws -- a form of dogmatism?
The use of the word 'law' in science is also an attempt to put social and cultural group pressure on individuals to conform or be punished by the group. At least this is part of the traditional meaning of the use of the word law. Thus we can see the the word law remains as being in the world of human social/cultural structure and in the supposed world of logic, has zero place in the world of science.
So we can have the word law in the world of science, if we are looking to prosecute people and possibly kill, ostracize or beat them to death, in public, for 'violating' laws. Which, according to the tenants of science, is patently absurd and against the very fabric of science and what it is supposed to stand for.
But the word works very well in religion. Is science with laws -- a form of dogmatism?