Why are these so many logical positivists and scientism supporters around these days? What happened? Are we re-running the 20th century but with a different random seed and the tech BS parameter set higher?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @o_guest
Scientism is bad, but a little bit of logical positivism never hurt anyone!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @o_guest
I think the logical positivists’ scrutiny of unclear language and untestable claims was a real contribution, for example, and we’d benefit today from more of that.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @pegleraj
Do you have examples of what you mean? Because superficially I think somebody who is not a logica positive would agree with that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest
The analysis of the language of science was a big part of what the logical positivists did. This probably problematically lead them to extreme positions like ‘the meaning of a sentence is the method of its verification’ - which was sort of the foundation for operationism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
They took it a bit far and the characteur of their positions took it even further - but it was an honest attempt to improve science I think. That’s why I say a little bit of lp is fine.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @pegleraj
Sorry if I was not clear. When I said examples, I meant examples where you think people in my field would "benefit today from more of that." — I just don't see this as a core problem of my field, but I could be totally wrong (hence why I am asking for clarification).
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
If anything I would say there is an obsession with formal methods, which is affecting the subfield I am in. negatively, even though it might seem to superficially help the greater field as a whole.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Ironically, computational modelling (my subfield) is highly formalised, but not in the way the field seems to understand or appreciate.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
But I am interested in what you think is going wrong (?) that needs more aspects of logical positivism (as opposed to something else) in the field?
-
-
I think most psychologists would be genuinely confused by the distinction between "formal methods" and computationally formalized theories. It's a hard distinction to wrap your head around. (assuming we're speaking of the same "formal methods")
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
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.
