- #31
- 19,875
- 10,883
Part two has been published
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/scientific-inference-come-know-stuff-ii/
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/scientific-inference-come-know-stuff-ii/
Scientific Inference and How We Come to Know Stuff - Comments
- Context: Insights
- Thread starter bapowell
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Logic Scientific
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the nature of scientific inference and knowledge, exploring philosophical perspectives, particularly those of Kuhn and Hume, as well as the implications of scientific theories in relation to their truth and application. Participants engage with concepts of certainty, the role of predictions, and the limits of scientific knowledge.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Conceptual clarification
- Debate/contested
- Meta-discussion
Main Points Raised
- Some participants express admiration for the insights presented, emphasizing the importance of understanding the philosophical underpinnings of scientific theories.
- One participant critiques a specific equation in the context of its evaluation, suggesting a correction to the mathematical formulation.
- Another participant argues that the truth of scientific theories is less important than their predictive accuracy and practical application, noting that many theories are not rigorously true but are "good enough" for practical purposes.
- Dr. Courtney emphasizes that scientific theories are not "really true" but are supported by inference and predictions, highlighting the need to understand the limits of scientific knowledge.
- There is a discussion about the political implications of scientific theories, with some participants suggesting that theories with significant policy implications are treated differently than those with less impact.
- Buzz raises a point regarding Hume's definition of knowledge, suggesting that it is incompatible with scientific knowledge, which is inherently uncertain.
- Another participant questions the relationship between calculated confidence levels in science and the concept of imperfection in knowledge, indicating a potential misunderstanding of Hume's arguments.
- There is a reiteration of the idea that all scientific measurements come with a degree of estimation, and confidence levels reflect this uncertainty.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a range of views on the nature of scientific knowledge, the implications of theories, and the role of certainty in science. There is no clear consensus, as multiple competing perspectives are presented throughout the discussion.
Contextual Notes
Some discussions hinge on the definitions of knowledge and truth, as well as the assumptions underlying different philosophical viewpoints. The conversation also touches on the implications of scientific theories in political contexts, which may influence how they are perceived and taught.
Similar threads
- · Replies 11 ·
- · Replies 9 ·
- · Replies 15 ·
- · Replies 24 ·
- · Replies 6 ·
- · Replies 3 ·
- · Replies 105 ·
- · Replies 26 ·
Insights
Name the Science Photo - Comments
- · Replies 16 ·
- · Replies 121 ·