Philosophy of Science Facebook group – Nature of science

Philosophy of Science Facebook group Alessandro Carvalho shared a link

[ 25/May/21 ]

All 6 answers are clearly wrong.

Science, at its best, is an eternal enquiry into the nature of being that uses a process of refining all elements of experimental design, performance, evaluation and interpretation to determine which of the available interpretive schema is most likely to account for all observations in the most parsimonious way possible.

And reality often has the unsettling characteristic of demanding responses to complex issues in very short times, so we all have many subconscious processes to simplify down reality under stress to produce rapid responses. This is often antithetical to science.

Thus science is a process of starting from a set of assumptions, and progressively become less wrong over time; as contexts allow.

When you do the numbers on the evidence sets currently available as to what seems (as a minimum) to be present in reality, and in the sets of possible interpretive schema available, then it seems entirely possible that there is sufficient complexity and uncertainty present that the process could be continued indefinitely.

It seems that we all get born with various sets of biases instantiated in our sensory and neural systems by the evolutionary processes of the last 4 billion years that we have strong tendencies to form certain classes of understandings and models in the first instance. Becoming as aware as possible of the many classes and instances of such biases is an essential step towards being able to see the infinities that seem very probably to exist beyond them.

Developing an ability to be comfortable with such fundamental uncertainty is very difficult for most human brains. The strong biases towards simple binary resolutions tend to make stepping beyond binary logic into the infinite realm of all possible logics and all possible sets of truth values too much for most. Thus what most are able to conceive of as science is a very simplistic model of what science actually is at its best.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) with reasonable security, tools, resources and degrees of freedom, and reasonable examples of the natural environment; and that is going to demand responsibility from all of us - see
This entry was posted in Philosophy, understanding and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s