I’ve been asked “If not Bayesianism, then what?” before and answered in http://meaningness.com/metablog/how-to-think …pic.twitter.com/TxqNgNHWFB
Better ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—around problems of meaning and meaninglessness; self and society; ethics, purpose, and value.
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.
| Country | Code | For customers of |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 40404 | (any) |
| Canada | 21212 | (any) |
| United Kingdom | 86444 | Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2 |
| Brazil | 40404 | Nextel, TIM |
| Haiti | 40404 | Digicel, Voila |
| Ireland | 51210 | Vodafone, O2 |
| India | 53000 | Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance |
| Indonesia | 89887 | AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata |
| Italy | 4880804 | Wind |
| 3424486444 | Vodafone | |
| » See SMS short codes for other countries | ||
This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.
Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.
When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.
The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.
Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.
Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.
Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.
See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.
Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.
I’ve been asked “If not Bayesianism, then what?” before and answered in http://meaningness.com/metablog/how-to-think …pic.twitter.com/TxqNgNHWFB
We actually don’t know how people know things. We do *know* it’s not via trivial bits of math. We need to find out!pic.twitter.com/ODlktRpBKJ
I realize this is reductionist in the extreme, but my bedrock epistemology has always been "trial and error."
"Keep what works, discard what doesn't" is the rule behind every process that generates knowledge.
The operative (and human-complete) word here is "works." But the "keep/discard" part of the rule is simple and universal.
(This is my attempt at a tweet-sized summary of Popper/Deutsch/Bartley.)
Yeah, I know only Popper of those, but I think his story is simplistic and does not match what scientists actually do.
It may not match scientists' day-to-day practice, but it matches science at some level of description (the relevant lvl, IMO).
I guess that depends in part on what your goals are. There is “why should we believe Science?” which Popper addresses, >
> and his story is probably pretty good for justifying Science to lay people.
And then there is “how do I find out why this biofilm is disrupted by gene product CPD1679,” >
> and Popper’s account is irrelevant to that. So maybe this is evidence for the “no one epistemology” thesis.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.