> On 9 Jun 2020, at 19:38, Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 at 10:25:41 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > On 6/8/2020 2:24 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 2:32:26 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> >> On 6/7/2020 11:21 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 10:00:46 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> It predicts everything, so it predicts nothing. AG >>> >>> >>> http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2020/05/predictions-are-overrated.html >>> <http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2020/05/predictions-are-overrated.html> : >>> >>> Predictions are overrated >>> >>> >>> <https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Mw6w74p3ZYk/XrA-FY5otOI/AAAAAAAAFMU/WiQ7KPBKkekS-DQDW09BgFF_-J92CfS3QCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/fortune-teller-2.jpeg> >> She writes, "If I have a scientific theory, it is either a good description >> of nature, or it is not." But that is just avoiding the question, which is >> how do we tell a theory that is a good description from a theory that is a >> bad description. Popper says making wrong predicitons means the theory is >> bad. He didn't say making correct predictions make a theory good...although >> Hossenfelder's made-up counter examples pretend that he did. >> >> Obviously there are other criteria for a good theory: Consilience with other >> good theories. Broad scope of application. Precise and unambiguous >> predictions. Clarity and ease of comprehension. Hossenfelder advocates >> "explanatory power" as a better critereon. I think the preceding are what >> constitute explantory power in the scientific sense. Without that >> qualification things like "God did it" or "It's all simulated inside >> arithmetic" have perfect explanatory power. >> >> Brent >> >> >> It's not clear, but a point she has made before is that although general >> relativity has a bunch of "confirmation" success, it is (literally) "wrong" >> (for very small stuff anyway), and quantum mechanics, which also has >> "confirmation" successes, is is incomplete. So both are ultimately >> failed theories. > > I think that's strange meaning of "failed". 90% of (very successful) > engineering is based on Newton and Maxwell. We will never know we have an > ultimately successful theory even if we do have it. > > Brent > >> >> Physicists who leap from the the "success" of the mathematics in the >> theories to claims about what physical stuff really is are clueless (in her >> view). >> >> But as Jim Baggott has said (in a tweet), she is a sloppy writer. >> >> @philipthrift >> > > > All descriptions of reality are inadequate, Feyerabend said. "You think that > this one-day fly, this little bit of nothing, a human being--according to > today's cosmology!--can figure it all out? This to me seems so crazy! It > cannot possibly be true! What they figured out is one particular response to > their actions, and this response gives this universe, and the reality that is > behind this is laughing! 'Ha ha! They think they have found me out!'" > > https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/was-philosopher-paul-feyerabend-really-science-s-worst-enemy/ > > <https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/was-philosopher-paul-feyerabend-really-science-s-worst-enemy/> > > @philipthrift > > This guy's a "philosopher"? He's just a jerk and you shouldn't waste our time > with this total crap! AG
I tend to agree with you on this. In fact, philosophy, metaphysics, theology, … has lost its scientific attitude after the separation of theology and science, mainly done by terror, violence, and the mix of state and religion (the authentic blasphemy arguably, as it confuse Earth and Heaven, in their abstract sense). Yet, that does not mean that all philosophers or all theologian, even from the institutions, are jerk. Feyerabend is just not quite convincing on this matter. Bruno > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/00de7a8e-1b82-40fc-8721-e98d1baecf96o%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/00de7a8e-1b82-40fc-8721-e98d1baecf96o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/68DD1CB9-9961-407F-912A-B82294F142F4%40ulb.ac.be.
