The grounding of intellectual trust remains unsolved.
-
-
As individuals we simply cannot perform all the experiments or check all the proofs ourselves. We neither have time nor is it economically or socially viable.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likesShow this thread -
Our reliance on institutions, reduces our problem to one of collaborative commons. But this hits the problem of the commons.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
How do you successfully evaluate the quality of epistemic commons without resorting to asking the epistemic commons?
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likesShow this thread -
Unfortunately the social (and material) rewards for truth seeking features seemingly accrue to institutions as happy coincidences rather than natural affinities.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Yet in practice airplanes do fly (technology demonstrates at least practical if not theoretical knowledge beyond refutation. And wars are fought, and sometimes won, this demonstrates the ability to coordinate people towards outcomes.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
And in so far as I have delved into physics I was able to perform some of the experiments myself.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
All these things constitute a clear floor on the epistemic commons in particular domains. There must be drivers of epistemic health in them at least. It is not however clear we understand these drivers very well.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread
Investigating the philosophy of science, or even the social science of science shows a landscape that has not yet clustered on a clear validated paradigm.
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.