Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
#135440 - 04/08/05 10:10 AM Refinery  
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 500
Elizabeth Creith Offline
addict
Elizabeth Creith  Offline
addict

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 500
Northern Ontario, Canada
I'm with Faldage. It doesn't refine a theory to prove it wrong, it overturns it. Science is rife with examples - like the French astronomer who was called to a village to examine a rock which the ignorant peasants said had fallen from the sky. He explained carefully to them that this was not possible, because there are no rocks in the sky.
I think that's been overturned lately - can't see how it could have been refined....




#135441 - 04/08/05 03:04 PM Eppur si muove!  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
AnnaStrophic Offline
Carpal Tunnel
AnnaStrophic  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
lower upstate New York
Not to mention Galileo.


#135442 - 04/08/05 03:58 PM Re: Refinery  
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 31
BraveLad Offline
newbie
BraveLad  Offline
newbie

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 31
California
Dear Elizabeth,

You wrote, "I'm with Faldage. It doesn't refine a theory to prove it wrong, it overturns it."

Let me clarify. I am not referring to the type of knowledge that is very concrete, such as the rocks in my head or in the sky. I am referring to the grand principles of events such as Newton's Laws of Motion. Einstein's Special Relativity modified these, 'refined' them if you will in the sense that in the ordinary case the predicted behaviors closely approximate each other.

Particular facts are like the leaves on a tree. They shake even in a gentle breeze that doesn't even make the trunk tremble. It is to such principles that correspond to the trunk of the tree of knowledge to which I am referring when I claim that refinement is a better description than revolution for real sciences. Most people BTW are not acquainted with such principles, so they will not easily appreciate my point.

My background is in Physics, Math, and Philosophy with a current career serving the Financial Industry with financial software.

Having been involved in technical fields, except for a brief stint in the military, I would occasionally grow discouraged at the dizzying pace of innovation and the difficulty of keeping up with it. Then I realized that the basic principles of the fields in which I was engaged for a living did not in fact change nearly as quickly over time. In fact they were either slowly added to or refined.

In Mathematics for instance, you do not see the sort of wholesale 'overturning' of which you speak, once at least it had become established on an axiomatic foundation. Physics is a distant second as to certainty compared to Physics.

Only in the past few years have I begun to grasp similarly axiomatic foundations of religion and politics. In the case of politics, I reinvented 'deontic logic' when attempting to describe the relationship between 'duty' and 'right.' Deontic logics are varieties of modal logic. In the religious instance, the axioms are those which make the 'Ontological Argument' work.

If Engineering principles changed as radically a the sort of particular 'facts' to which you refer do, then buildings and bridges would be falling down in ordinary circumstances with much greater frequency than they in fact do. But what we see are structural failures in extreme conditions if the engineers and contractors are following those principles. Good thing for us that in so many 'practical' areas that basic principles are more reliable in 'hard' than in 'soft' fields!

BraveLad



#135443 - 04/08/05 08:31 PM Re: Refinery  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
TheFallibleFiend Offline
veteran
TheFallibleFiend  Offline
veteran

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
Virginia, USA

I'm not sure. Depends partly on what one means by 'modern science.' Caloric theory and Bode's Law have been debunked, but were legitimate science with evidence to support them.

I think the problem with the characterization isn't whether science can overturn old ideas. Whether we view it as an overturning or a refinement seems a semantic argument to me. The thing is that even when science has overturned old ideas, that hasn't been its goal. There's nothing in science that says, "Everybody's too comfortable, we have to switch things around a little." Rather, things have had to change (overturn or refine, I dont' care which phrase is used) because while the existing theory seems to explain X and Y very well, it's a little weak on Z.

k





#135444 - 04/09/05 01:01 AM Re: Well, Looking for a Writer...  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Faldage Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Faldage  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
You wrote, "Science is all about overturning received knowledge."

Au contraire Aged Fald (a title of respect)! The mark of true science is that each sucessive theory refines the previous one, not overturns it.


Yes, and I went on to say, "If a theory is accepted by the main body of science you best know what you're talking about if you're thinking of overturning it."

And, while Fald and age are the lexemes in question, the latter has nothing at all to do with senectitude, irregardless of whether or not I am or am not a geezer or not.




#135445 - 07/25/05 12:33 PM Re: Well, Looking for a Writer...  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


hi. looking for writers, not to sure whats it about, could you please give me some information. ania [ireland]


#135446 - 09/21/05 04:00 AM Re: Well, Looking for a Writer...  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I am the best known of Financial Astrologers, and have written a financial newsletter for 28 years, with one of the finest written records.
On CNBC fincl TV 4-5 times a year, also speak at fincl conferences.


#135447 - 03/15/06 02:50 PM Re: Well, Looking for a Writer...  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


And the best writers, such as Steinbeck in Of Mice and Men, never are echoed by real life stories that make the same point, which are considered too bizarre or abnormal. Why?

#135448 - 03/16/06 01:30 AM Re: Well, Looking for a Writer...  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Jackie Offline
Jackie  Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Louisville, Kentucky
Tell you what, Anonymous--you tell me who you are in a way I can verify, and tell how you got on here without registering, and I'll give you an answer.

#135449 - 05/16/06 07:17 PM Re: reading and comp 1A  
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 456
Aramis Offline
addict
Aramis  Offline
addict

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 456
SE US
A. was thinking Nietzsche or Dostoyevsky, but Mein Kampf probably is pretty extreme. Did not get through this whole string so sorry if anyone pitched either already.


Γ╥┐↕
Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Moderated by  Jackie 

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,878
Posts223,798
Members9,012
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
KathrynH, Waqar_Ali, brecht, Akintola, VegasCaptain
9012 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 43 guests, and 2 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters(All Time)
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,538
LukeJavan8 8,947
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2017 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.014s Queries: 13 (0.004s) Memory: 2.7341 MB (Peak: 2.8641 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2017-07-28 08:57:25 UTC