|
|
|
|
|
|
by jibal
2 days ago
|
|
|
This is a ridiculous strawman argument that misconstrues what people are saying is good about science--that it constantly reexamines and improves upon its models. You're saying that it would be preferable to have an oracle that flawlessly tells us the truth, and therefore the fallibility of science is "a weakness of the process", but that's completely absurd, a radical failure of reasoning, as of course no such oracle is possible. Given the inherent limitations of finding empirical facts, and empirical generalizations that only hold because we live in a lawful universe (so far, and everywhere we've looked--it is of course logically possible for it to be otherwise, as Hume noted), science is a very effective and powerful method, the best method conceived. I won't engage further with such bad reasoning and arguments that verge on bad faith. |
|
|
Summary:
1. "Science" can only correct when economics allows it to do so. 2. True believers of science who are ever apologetic to the problems with contemporary scientific method provides economic incentives, and prevent real science to happen.
Hence my irritation with the "Celebration" when ever science makes a mistakes (an apologetic gesture to stop the loss of "faith" in science), because that is the unmistaken mark of a "True believer".