@arteteco @solanaceae I dont disagree with that. They should not suggest authority over others. And yea, skepticism should be taken gracefully of course.
Conversation
Notices
-
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Saturday, 18-Aug-2018 18:33:07 UTC 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 -
Peter Gallagher (pwgallagher@qoto.org)'s status on Sunday, 19-Aug-2018 00:22:25 UTC Peter Gallagher @freemo @arteteco @solanaceae You’ve reached an amicable conclusion. I’m late to the party (sorry). Your debate on the possible truth states of unfalsifiable propositions is interesting. I have recently realized (been convinced) that the “Popperian” views on fasifiability I thought I held are sort of out-of-date. The alternative view, which I now accept, is that in physics (& economics AFAIK) most hypoths. are never in fact falsified but rather “implausified” and everyone (or most) moves on to the next thing. I find this an attractive idea both from experience and for its Humean character (ie. his argument that our belief in causation is nothing more than a series of “more and more plausible” — eventually convincing — associations). The most intriguing discussion I have seen of this general subject is in connection with contemporary efforts to escape the “dead end” in the Standard Model of physics/cosmology: Sabine Hossenfelder’s “Lost In Math” — a book that I highly recommend, if you have not read it. Here’s a good, sympathetic, review/précis of the argument::http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=10314
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 repeated this.
-