What is the implication for scientific practice? I don't see what the consequence is. We can combine words/ideas into an infinite set, how does that effect a scientists work?
-
-
-
Well, apparently
@DavidDeutschOxf meant something different from what I took the passage as pointing toward, so I can’t speak to what he intended. - 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
i borrowed his book from the lib when first started reading meaningness but never actually read it bc i thought it wouldn't be on the same wavelength
-
I haven’t actually read it :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think
@DavidDeutschOxf argues that one can explicitly separate better from worse theories through the property of being "hard to vary." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explanatory_power … -
Thanks, that’s interesting and makes sense!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It's interesting that you agree with this (as do I).
@DavidDeutschOxf is quite solidly Popperian. If I recall from previous exchanges, you are less than sold on Popper's philosophy of science? -
I need to revisit that. There are different interpretations of Popper (apparently), some of which may be copacetic.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
also points to strong potential for cultural reduction: if it does not fit western common sense it must be rejected etc. Are western scientists rationalists fundamentalists then, reducing the "the grass eaters" as superstitious? also a concern how AI is trained with western bias.
-
I’m not sure, but I think he meant “eat a pound of grass” as an example of something that no one would come up with, rather than something that might come from another culture.
- 3 more replies
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.
