Yes, science is self-correcting. It holds that knowledge is always provisional and tries to falsify findings to weed out error.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @Counteredlogos
Science survives. The knowledge it produces is provisional, constantly corrected & updated.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
But content changes method, they develop together
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
-
Replying to @Counteredlogos
Knowledge seeking by testing, falsifying, replicating. We have gained considerable scientific knowledge though methods change and things once thought true are refuted. In fact, that's how we have gained things like aeroplanes, computers & antibiotics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Of course. But I'm fascinated by accounts of scientists discovering things which undermine even the classical inductive method, but that's not to say I think we can revert to before Francis Bacon or that I'm dismissing the whole enterprise.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Counteredlogos @HPluckrose
And yes aeroplanes, computers, and antibiotics are great. We just need science now to deal with climate change and antibiotic resistant bugs and I'll love it even more.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Counteredlogos
Me too. It's the only thing that can and this is why antimodernists undermining or rejecting it worry me so much.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Well I don't know if it can or not, nor if it does what shadows the next set of redemptive eurekas will cast. Maybe that's the nub of where we differ.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
It might not be able to and we could go extinct. But it is the only thing that has a shot.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.