Falsification is the ideal towards which science (and scientists) should strive. Whether they live up to it is a secondary question.
-
-
Replying to @KevinSimler
I think the actual issue is whether a group is open to the possibility of adopting an alternative theory—not “falsification” as such.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
The processes by which an epistemologically sane group considers & eventually adopts a better theory are complex, >
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
and are, empirically, not well-described by falsificationism.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
Can your position be summarized as "Sociology of science is more important than phil of science to make science better?"
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Also, since it seems you want to talk us out of falsification, do you have a better alternative? ;)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @brewingsense @KevinSimler
Yes, but it is messy and complicated. The attraction of falsificationism is that any twelve-year-old can understand it in science class.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
Kuhn got a lot (but not all) of the story right. The ethnomethodologists filled in a lot more pieces (but got some things badly off).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
Kuhn’s explanation is meta-rational, but if a reader doesn’t understand that, they’ll take it as irrational or anti-rational.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
In the 60s, almost everyone misunderstood him that way, and criticized him for things he absolutely didn’t say or believe.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So mostly everyone now thinks he advocated some sort of mystical paradigm-shift woo, and his actual insights are mainly lost.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @KevinSimler
This is very interesting. Seems I need to read Kuhn. You're consistently killing my free time ;)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @brewingsense @KevinSimler
Sorry! Consider starting with his 1969 Postscript, in which he explains how and why the original 1962 version was misunderstood.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.