FWIW I endorse your impression that you would not find reading it a positive experience and I would recommend against it for you even if I wouldn't in general.
-
-
Replying to @DRMacIver
Thank you! Popper was a great guy and I’d love to discover I’m somehow missing something valuable in his seemingly content-free philosophy of science, but [puts on Bayesian hat] that seems highly improbable.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
I think what you're missing is a desire for simple solutions that allow you to stop thinking about the problem further.
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
-
Replying to @Meaningness
That being said, I don't think I find Popper entirely content-free. I think falsification describes a useful toy model of how a specific aspect of theory development works, helpful for reasoning about part of the process, it's just not a fully accurate or general description.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DRMacIver
tbf, part of the problem is that no one has articulated a more accurate account of science *in terms that scientists would listen to*. So the toy model persists for lack of an easily available alternative. (obvs, my intention is to fix this, if I can get time for the project)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
Susan Haack's crossword puzzle analogy is pretty good, but for various reasons I don't think has really been picked up by scientists and is mostly aimed at philosophers of science. http://sci-hub.tw/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02683186 …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DRMacIver
Thanks, will read! I believe all the necessary pieces of an accurate account are available, but scattered across a dozen academic fields, and academics don’t feel responsible for assembling them into a coherent, accessible form. As an internet eccentric, I can do that.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
I wish there were fewer subjects that this tweet could apply to.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DRMacIver
I just read Haack’s wikipedia entry; she talks about the importance of her independence from academic institutions. Naturally, as an internet eccentric, I think the most effective way to promote progress now is to support internet eccentrics….
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ah, yes, here we go, from (Haack 1995):pic.twitter.com/w6O255uYJB
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.