Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
Meaningness's profile
David Chapman
David Chapman
David Chapman
@Meaningness

Tweets

David Chapman

@Meaningness

Better ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—around problems of meaning and meaninglessness; self and society; ethics, purpose, and value.

meaningness.com/about-my-sites
Joined September 2010

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    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

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    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

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    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

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. onnlucky 🍀‏ @onnlucky 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness

      But is that an example of scientific induction though? It doesn’t abstract to an underlying causal system. It’s merely a predictor based on past data.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    2. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @onnlucky

      This is controversial within the philosophy of science. Most theories say that good scientific theories are predictive. “Causality” is pretty much impossible to define. Working scientists are likely to have a different view! But they can’t define causality either.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. onnlucky 🍀‏ @onnlucky 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness

      Either you have a statistical model, or you have a model of some internal mechanisms that cause the phenomenon (with perhaps some statistical models at deeper levels). Both are predictive, but with only one can we know what cannot happen.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    4. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @onnlucky

      I think this is right. However, there’s no worked-out version of what a mechanistic model means, in general, so far as I know. This is definitely a problem for the philosophy of science. It think it’s probably also a problem for scientific practice, but that’s less clear!

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    5. Tracy Harms‏ @kaleidic 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @onnlucky

      The problem you point to was one aspect of the problem most prominently solved by Karl Popper. @DavidDeutschOxf is fine on this topic but if we set aside his writings there are still many other elaborations of the remedy.

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    6. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @kaleidic @onnlucky @DavidDeutschOxf

      I’ve read several versions of Popperism and found them unconvincing. Fwiw

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @kaleidic and

      (I have not read much of Popper’s own work, however, and my mind is still open on this)

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Tracy Harms‏ @kaleidic 19 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @onnlucky @DavidDeutschOxf

      I was sure you had looked at it some. My experience is that the only sound presentations come from advocates. DD is among those but by no means alone.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Erik Foss‏ @subjectOriented 27 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @kaleidic @Meaningness and

      Yeah, the essential point made by the “paradox” is that to treat non-contradiction as evidence, we would have to frame the problem WRT an enumeration of all arbitrary raven / non-raven things we might consider.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Erik Foss‏ @subjectOriented 27 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @subjectOriented @kaleidic and

      To reason about the types and instances (abstractions and the concrete entities they apply to) involved, there must be a distinction between actual corroboration and mere non-contradiction, which Bayes’s solution formalizes.

      3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 27 Apr 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @subjectOriented @kaleidic and

      It does seem inescapable that one somehow weighs evidence for and against a hypothesis (although, if I understand correctly, Popper strongly resisted this). Probability theory (Bayes or otherwise) is the obvious method, and was broadly adopted. It has its own problems, though.

      10:36 AM - 27 Apr 2018
      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Erik Foss‏ @subjectOriented 27 Apr 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @kaleidic and

          Popper’s “resistance” to the idea that science is based on induction strikes me as commonly misinterpreted (maybe even by Popper). Rather, he basically defined inductive inference as a special case of deductive inference.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Tracy Harms‏ @kaleidic 27 Apr 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @subjectOriented @Meaningness and

          This does not at all fit my understanding of Popper on induction.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        4. 3 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Evan "no flu" O'Leary‏ @EvanOLeary 13 Jun 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @subjectOriented and

          Evidence refutes already formed theories or not. Take eg evidence of universe's accelerating expansion, dark energy: how is that weighed? Weight describes irrational ppls emotions abt evidence: a creationist shown "enough" fossils. A scientist only needs to see 1 to be interested

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Evan "no flu" O'Leary‏ @EvanOLeary 19 Sep 2019
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @EvanOLeary @Meaningness and

          I wonder if Deborah Mayo's well-probedness measure could save this. Also, correction, dark energy is the name of a problem not a theory.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. End of 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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Imprint
        • Cookies
        • Ads info