So much relevant expertise in political science. This would be so much better as a team project that included them.https://twitter.com/GovernorTomWolf/status/962060492175900674 …
Show this thread
-
I was trying to make a very specific point about the conditions under which knowledge can build. I'd be a bit more measured today, particularly understanding some of the problems around replication - many fields of science seem to barely deserve the term.
By contrast, there are parts of mathematic & physics (& a few other fields, though spottier) where it's possible to make tight arguments thousands of pages long, integrating the results of tens of thousands of people. I know of nothing remotely like that in politics.
-
-
The complexity of the argument behind something like the Poincare conjecture (which I do _not_ understand in detail, though I understand pieces of the background) is really astounding, and relies on very, very tight conditions for accepting results.
-
Conversely (and this is a point that Sperber makes in his fantastic book Explaining Culture) to properly understand a mathematical proof is to _know_ that it is right, which is profoundly different from more social forms of knowledge. But I’ve hijacked Corrine’s feed for too long
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The Unfeasibly Large Proof or whatever it is (it always sounded to me like something out of one of the more delightfully improbable Douglas Adams novels).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.