more fodder

[gepr]

Given the rather coarse discussion of empiricism and justificationism (confirmationism) discussed in the Quanta article, I thought the first section of this article would be a useful addendum:

Intelligent design or intricate deception? What I told students during the Kitzmiller trial
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2015/12/intelligent-design-or-intricate-deception-the-making-of-an-antiscience-what-i-told-students-during-t.html

The last part where he's criticizing Intelligent Design is not so interesting, except that it might be fun to replace ID with string theory and see where it gets us. 8^) Anyway, here are a few quotes (mainly terminological) relevant to our thread(s):

o on tortuous citation accumulation:

"If an adversary who is determined not to be convinced demands more evidence, there is no point in trying to give it to him.  He will complain of the inadequacy of any volume of evidence, and will always be able to ask for more, in much the same way that the coal companies keep on demanding more evidence for global warming."

o on the "internal consistency" of a language:

"Firstly, let me define my terms.  By literalism, I mean the belief that it is possible to find out the truth about things by closely examining words."

o on achieving ideals/utopias/Grand Unified Anything:

"By absolutism, I mean the belief that it is possible to arrive at a final absolute statement of the truth.  Absolutists generally believe, although logically they do not really have to, that they themselves happen to be the ones in this fortunate position."

o on the non-primacy of justification, including arguments from consistency, parsimony, and elegance:

"I will use the term fallibilists for those who believe that, except perhaps in certain areas of mathematics or of direct experience, absolute certainty is not of this world, that some degree of uncertainty attaches itself to all their opinions, and that they are certainly wrong about many things, although they don't know which.  In their working lives, at least, all scientists are fallibilists.  That is because we care about the facts, and our experience shows that the facts can prove us wrong.  This position leaves no room in science for absolutism or literalism.  Nor should we want there to be, since reality is more interesting, subtle, and complex than our ability to describe it."

o on libertarianism, thin/thick, premature conclusion:

"For American audiences in particular, there is the ever popular illusion of individualism; this is what I believe, dammit, and no pointy head is going to tell me different. Above all, literalism gives you an easy way of resolving complex issues.  It deals with words instead of dealing with things."

--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com