|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Date: Sep 16, 2008 03:52
This is a belief that when all theories are just as likely both are
equally as simple so we cannot use the Ockham's Razor, we should use the
easiest explanation.
Say for example a museum has an item labeled OPink. They find out one
day that it could be equally an OPink or an OBlack. They cannot be sure.
Using the default theory they would say we have all our pamphlets saying
it is an OPink, we have a government permit saying that it is an OPink
and everyone calls it an OPink so until some evidence comes forward to
say it is an OBlack, we will continue to name it an OPink.
|
| |
|
| | 9 Comments |
|
|
Author: Leon HoeneveldLeon Hoeneveld Date: Sep 16, 2008 04:06
SolomonW schreef:
> This is a belief that when all theories are just as likely both are
> equally as simple so we cannot use the Ockham's Razor, we should use the
> easiest explanation.
>
> Say for example a museum has an item labeled OPink. They find out one
> day that it could be equally an OPink or an OBlack. They cannot be sure.
>
> Using the default theory they would say we have all our pamphlets saying
> it is an OPink, we have a government permit saying that it is an OPink
> and everyone calls it an OPink so until some evidence comes forward to
> say it is an OBlack, we will continue to name it an OPink.
>
What Kuhn in his book "the structure of scientific revolutions" argues
is that we stick to an old paradigm as long as possible, but then a
paradigm-shift will take place...
|
| Show full article (1.03Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Date: Sep 16, 2008 07:46
[This followup was posted to alt.philosophy and a copy was sent to the
cited author.]
In article aioe.org>, leonhoen@antispam.zonnet.nl says...> SolomonW schreef:
>> This is a belief that when all theories are just as likely both are
>> equally as simple so we cannot use...
|
| Show full article (1.52Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Leon HoeneveldLeon Hoeneveld Date: Sep 16, 2008 09:34
SolomonW schreef:
> [This followup was posted to alt.philosophy and a copy was sent to the
> cited author.]
Be sure to remove the "antispam". I don't want bots to harvest my
email-address.
>> What Kuhn in his book "the structure of scientific revolutions" argues
>> is that we stick to an old paradigm as long as possible,
>
> It is a while since I read his book but if I remember his argument was
> that once a paradigm is in place, it is difficult to make sense unless
> you use the paradigm.
|
| Show full article (1.33Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ZerkonXZerkonX Date: Sep 17, 2008 06:07
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:52:22 +1000, SolomonW wrote:
> we will continue to name it an OPink.
We will continue to call a tomato a vegetable?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: SeanSean Date: Sep 17, 2008 06:19
"ZerkonX" X.net> wrote in message news:pan.2008.09.17.13.10.19@X.net...> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:52:22 +1000, SolomonW wrote:
>
>> we will continue to name it an OPink.
>
> We will continue to call a tomato a vegetable?
Um, a tomatoe, is actually a fruit, not a vegtable, Z.
Take it from me, I was a green grocer once upon a time. If that counts? :-)
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Sep 17, 2008 07:54
>>> What Kuhn in his book "the structure of scientific revolutions" argues
>>> is that we stick to an old paradigm as long as possible,
>>
>> It is a while since I read his book but if I remember his argument was
>> that once a paradigm is in place, it is difficult to make sense unless
>> you use the paradigm.
>
> In the case of Gallileo, G. gave lectures with his heliocentric ideas
> ridiculing the ideas of many teachers of astronomy, making a lot of
> enemies. Noone likes to be approached disrespectfully.
That might be the politeness theory.
|
| Show full article (1.31Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Leon HoeneveldLeon Hoeneveld Date: Sep 17, 2008 09:35
SolomonW schreef:
> Interestingly that theory never took off even though at the time, it had
> much merit.
No matter what theory you choose, the truth won't change. The world
remains the world.
But maybe as Clifford once argued (about belief) one has the
responsability to investigate beliefs and to ask questions regarding a
point of view.
The consequence being that sometimes a view has to change because a
certain aspect of the theory has become really troublesome.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ZerkonXZerkonX Date: Sep 18, 2008 06:29
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:19:35 +1000, Sean wrote:
> Um, a tomatoe, is actually a fruit, not a vegtable, Z.
That's was my point!
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: SeanSean Date: Sep 18, 2008 17:34
"ZerkonX" X.net> wrote in message news:pan.2008.09.18.13.32.15@X.net...> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:19:35 +1000, Sean wrote:
>
>> Um, a tomatoe, is actually a fruit, not a vegtable, Z.
>
> That's was my point!
hehehehe, thanks to me, others will now have noticed it. :)
You're welcome.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
