Roger Critchlow wrote at 10/15/2013 08:24 AM:
[...] correctly formed explanations can be uninformed opinions or fallacious
reasonings or imaginary evidence, and flawed as they are they can still sound true
to some social population, so people get positive feedback for ridiculous
explanations
I think the article's plea to see the liberal arts and sciences as a united
front pursuing evidence and reason based explanations has something to do
with Lee's rant about semantic infelicities between disciplines. They're
all doing the same thing for a fuzzy enough definition of thing.
In
Roger,
I have stayed out of this one, pretty much, but I want to say how much I
liked this post.
Hope I run into you some time.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
Nature publishes a letter:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v502/n7471/full/502303d.html
Communication:
Metaphors advance scientific research
which references a perspective:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v500/n7464/full/500523a.html
Communication:
Mind the metaphor
and another
Are you a subscriber? I hit the pay wall. I probably can get at these
articles via Clark, but it will involve starting all over again and looking
them from the Clark portal.
Do you have a smarter way?
NIc k
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark
I would rework Steve's explanation. Just as infants babble to learn the
correct sounds for their native language by feedback, older children babble
explanations to see what works. Unfortunately, correctly formed
explanations can be uninformed opinions or fallacious reasonings or
imaginary
Roger -
I would rework Steve's explanation. Just as infants babble to learn
the correct sounds for their native language by feedback, older
children babble explanations to see what works. Unfortunately,
correctly formed explanations can be uninformed opinions or fallacious
reasonings or
Roger/Glen -
I would rework Steve's explanation. Just as infants babble to learn
the correct sounds for their native language by feedback, older
children babble explanations to see what works. Unfortunately,
correctly formed explanations can be uninformed opinions or fallacious
reasonings
Nick's metaphor answer is generative (even if vague). Steve's selection
answer is constraint-based. So, they're in different categories. I'll posit another generative
answer: finite capacities. As social animals, we're bred to interact, even if there's nothing to
actually interact
