Donuel, I don't disregard your posts "regarding physics and the non empirical sciences." I simply don't feel competent to discuss those matters - so I read and don't say much.

But you speak of "non-empirical sciences," and I think that's the exact opposite of what you mean. I get it that some aspects of science cannot be explored through deductive reasoning (using the tools of logic), but I thought those others were explored through empirical reasoning. Empirical reasoning is the process of thinking critically about organizing, analyzing, and visualizing qualitative, quantitative, and/or geospatial data. So, if physics and these others you speak of are "non-empirical," what are they? The non-empirical sciences are the ones that do not use the scientific method. If you Google non-empirical science, you'll end up at a Wikipedia article on "Formal Science" that begins with this:

Formal sciences are disciplines concerned with formal systems, such as logic, mathematics, statistics, theoretical computer science, information theory, game theory, systems theory, decision theory, and portions of linguistics and economics. Whereas the natural sciences seek to characterize physical systems, the formal sciences are concerned with characterizing abstract structures described by sign systems. The formal sciences aid the natural sciences by providing information about the structures the latter use to describe the world, and what inferences may be made about them.

So, it's saying that logic itself is a "non-empirical science," as is mathematics. Logic is a valuable and necessary tool in its place, in most fields of intellectual endeavor. I did pretty well in Logic class and Math, but tended to fall asleep during Physics.

-Joe-