35
votes
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
Asimov's "The Relativity of Wrong" has a lot to say about this.
John, when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical, they were wrong. ...
- 6,297
33
votes
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
It is not a coincidence that you ask this here at philosophy SE, and not over at physics: The vast majority of physicists would simply reject your question and readily admit that their theories are ...
- 1,130
5
votes
On the connection between science and reality
I don't remember which one, but I think it was Special Relativity that Einstein formulated purely on the basis of thought and did not keep anything to fit observed reality.
This is false. There were ...
4
votes
On the connection between science and reality
Caveat
There are some different metaphysical positions on the universe. Some have the belief the universe is a hologram, and others say it's a simulation; some believe in multiple universes. My ...
- 9,883
4
votes
Accepted
On the connection between science and reality
I agree with you than one can extend a series of why-questions and corresponding answers to infinite length. At which point should one stop?
Usually one stops when one has obtained a physical theory, ...
- 20.5k
4
votes
Can hatred and retribution be justified and rationalized without free will?
If free will is absent because of determinism, hatred and retribution - when they occur - occur inevitably. Any rationalisation and/or justification which takes place is also inevitable.
So, yes, ...
- 906
4
votes
Can emotions be logical? And can logic and emotion co-exist?
Here's a related discussion, in which my answer points out 'pure reason' cannot provide motivations, or values The illogical nature of want/motivation and its effects on free will
One of the primary ...
- 9,989
3
votes
Can hatred and retribution be justified and rationalized without free will?
Clearly anger at the weather is pointless, but retribution against a (seemingly) self-aware individual may have the effect of changing the future behaviour of that individual, or those associated with ...
- 457
3
votes
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
An engineer does not view a theory from the viewpoint of whether its predictions are 100% correct to the utmost limit of precision. Instead, an engineer judges a theory based on the question, "...
- 151
3
votes
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
Every physical theory may be either wrong or incomplete. This is because mathematics is used as a language to describe physics and we have Gödel's incompleteness theorems
But this is just to say that ...
- 177
3
votes
On physical existence. Do virtual particles of QFT exist?
According to the current interpretation of QFT, virtual particles
are not physical objects but mathematical artefacts. Virtual
particles arise when applying Feynman‘s pertubation theory to
solve ...
- 20.5k
2
votes
On physical existence. Do virtual particles of QFT exist?
Some other interesting examples are:
The wave-function of quantum particles, given we can only take measurements that indicate it, never measure it.
Dark-matter, which has no direct observations ...
- 9,989
2
votes
On the connection between science and reality
Science to understand and predict reality
First, we observe that objects near Earth's surface accelerate downwards at some degree.
Then, through various experiments and measurements, we come to ...
- 668
2
votes
Does causation exist?
Causality (ie claiming effects have causes) is not identical to determinism (ie effects are uniquely defined by causes in one-to-one manner).
Causality can co-exist with indeterminism proper, at least ...
- 543
2
votes
Can emotions be logical? And can logic and emotion co-exist?
It is possible that emotions, like beliefs, are suspicious entities, where the grounds for holding them suspect are along the lines of eliminative materialism. "Syntactically," we might pair ...
- 2,935
2
votes
Can emotions be logical? And can logic and emotion co-exist?
Can emotions be logical?
Emotions may be predictable via logic. They might emerge in predictable ways. For example:
John is usually saddened by suffering, particularly by the suffering of people he ...
- 906
2
votes
Can hatred and retribution be justified and rationalized without free will?
I mean at the risk of either playing captain obvious or saying something really stupid. But isn't he defeating his own statement? Like if you were to accept determinism and reject a free will and a ...
- 307
2
votes
"You never know until you try"?
You kinda have to define what you mean by "you (never) know" in that statement. Like if you go to the abstract logic then there are things that you can know without trying them. If you go to ...
- 307
1
vote
Does time have a changing speed?
You are confusing the scientific definition of time (what a clock measures) with your intuitive feeling of how things change. This has nothing to do with time being relative according to relativity ...
- 139
1
vote
"You never know until you try"?
Whether theft is wrong or not is irrelevant.
You can truly never know what it is like to experience something until you have experienced it.
I believe there are no limits to the underlying nature of ...
- 121
1
vote
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
Your question tacitly assumes that, because our physical theories cannot predict the behavior of objects to perfect precision, those theories are wrong. That conclusion is intuitive, but in fact need ...
- 176
1
vote
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
A Theory of Everything would require knowledge of everything for it to be a correct theory. So, by this reasoning, all theories are wrong until the knowledge of everything is achieved.
- 172
1
vote
We know Classical Mechanics is wrong. But can we also say every other theory is wrong except the Theory of Everything?
Each theory in natural science has a bounded domain of validity. I consider this a basic insight, well-known to each working scientist.
A 'Theory of Everything' does not exist. The term contradicts ...
- 20.5k
1
vote
On the connection between science and reality
I don't remember which one, but I think it was Special Relativity that Einstein formulated purely on the basis of thought and did not keep anything to fit observed reality.
Far from it! The theory ...
1
vote
Proper Philosophical Texts on the Philosophy of Science
In addition to the books already recommended I would like to add:
Paul Dirac: The Principles of Quantum mechanics (1930). I recommend just the first pages of Dirac's introduction.
Werner Heisenberg:...
- 20.5k
1
vote
What is the difference between a Belief and Truth
Here is where I left off studying Philosophy in college:
ME: How can we tell the difference between truth and a false belief?
PROF: Truth is true and a false belief is false.
ME: But how can we see it?...
- 135
1
vote
Essential reading list in the philosophy of science
I second the Polanyi recommendation. And would add Bernard Lonergan and John Henry Newman -- and if you can stand the depth, C S Peirce
- 45
1
vote
Statements about real world
We make statements like "This table is composed from atoms". This statement must be true or false. But what if tomorrow the atomic theory is completely abandoned and we work with another ...
- 6,297
1
vote
Is there any supporter of Michael Polanyi's criticism of scientific objectivism?
MP has a growing and very educated following. His thought is much like John Henry Newman and Bernard Lonergan, though independently arrived at
A full-scale monograph on Personal Knowledge has just ...
- 45
1
vote
Is scientism a self defeating epistemology?
In answering any question you submit it to the one and only mind we have. So the scientist who is a believer in God is not using a different mind. Data might be of some help here:
Over 65% of Nobel ...
- 45
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible