I think I'm posting too frequently. But I'm compelled to make one comment:
On 12/31/18 2:28 PM, Eric Charles wrote: > And by just such a series of discoveries (Peirce believes), the scientific > method progresses us towards beliefs that are ever-more stable, and... > least some of the time... towards a belief that will hold up across all > potential tests. When I read your caveat progression, I do not hear "ever-more stable". I hear "ever-more detailed". It's not the stability of the core concept (whatever that may mean). It's the *context* that matters. And statements like "over here, but not over there" or "now but not later" ARE context. So, what you're describing the scientist doing (and with which I agree) is controlled experimentation. Remove the experimental details and you remove whatever Truth they may have contained. The methods section is the most interesting part of the paper, right? -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ 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 archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
