New answers tagged

0

the idea of an irrational number like sqrt(2) has nothing to do either mathematically or physically with quantum uncertainty (i.e., the noncommutativity of the position and momentum operators); the concept of irrationality can be demonstrated in the absence of quantum mechanics and vice versa.


0

I'm confused by the question. The solution to the tower of hanoi puzzle can be proven by mathematical induction, which itself is an example of deductive logic. Isn't it helpful to be able to prove things, to know that we have the right answer? The tower of hanoi is a highly abstract example, but the solution (how to solve it with the fewest moves possible) ...


1

Uncertainty and infinity are related but different concepts. On the one hand, uncertainty is a concept that expresses a state of modality, or whether or not knowledge or information is complete or certain. This is related to such concepts as probability and determinism. Infinity is a concept related to cardinality and ordinality, that is to say counting and ...


0

According to Cambridge Dictionary: conspiracy noun [ C or U ] uk ​ /kənˈspɪr.ə.si/ us ​ /kənˈspɪr.ə.si/ The activity of secretly planning with other people to do something bad or illegal This means all premeditated crimes involving more that one person imply a conspiracy. If you suspect of a plot or plan was made to commit a crime between 2 or ...


0

Prime example: the theory that the Bush administration was lying about the Iraqi WMD in order to gain public support for a war with a hidden agenda was a textbook conspiracy theory, until it was revealed to be entirely true by the Bush administration itself. Spinoza in his political treatise had a word about what we would call now "conspiracy theories", and ...


1

A conspiracy theory, by definition, is the implication that an event or set of events is caused by the intentional, coordinated action of a group of people. Intention and coordination are essential; they are what constitute a conspiracy rather than mere happenstance. Actual conspiracies do exist, and there have been conspiracy theories that have panned out ...


3

Conspiracy is a fact of life. The Wikipedia list that you linked to is but a very tiny sample. And your suggestion that few of them accomplished anything "tangible" is absurd. What's intangible about the destruction of a commercial airliner or a torpedoed economy? Ever hear the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."? People who ...


2

To answer your question, experience and empiricism are very strongly related, but not exactly the same thing. The sciences (whether biological, chemical, physical, psychological, etc.) each rely on the the doctrine of empiricism in their respective philosophies. That is to say, the philosophy of science invokes empirical philosophy as a justification of ...


1

Shadowzee's comment is on point: Adam Savage said "The Only Difference Between Screwing Around and Science Is Writing It Down". We all observe the world around us, do stuff, observe consequences, and come up with explanations for how the actions and consequences are related. Science is simply a formalized process for using experience to learn about the ...


0

The business of correctly interpreting bubble chamber, spark chamber, and other types of detector tracks in the field of particle physics is a very well-developed science. The belief in the validity of modeling particle interactions via interpretation of detector signals is rooted in the experimental fact that those techniques furnish useful, repeatable ...


2

I've been doing a lot of research on this very question and will be publishing some of my findings in a series of books on political science. Are there any relevant figures who talk about the credibility crisis the western world is going through? The corruption of science (and philosophy) is more extensive than most people probably realize. Sadly, I'm ...


0

Quantum mechanics implies a formulation in which from initial data a (classical) probability distribution is derived, so that (unless we have a single possibility, with 100% probability) "facts" cannot be deduced, we only infer propensities. Experimental scientists have kept applying classical probability theory, the world has always been stochastic. What ...


1

An extensive List on wikipedia List_of_scientific_misconduct_incidents (nothing on global warming nor 9/11 considered by capitalistic mainstream media as mere "conspiracy theories") Joachim Boldt (Germany), an anesthesiologist formerly based at the Justus Liebig University Giessen, was stripped of his professorship and criminally investigated for ...


1

You might like to check out this website https://retractionwatch.com It's fascinating the scams that scientist get up up to. They are, after all, just people. You say - "Distrust in science and mass-media have turn out in cases in which parents decided not to vaccine their children because of irrational fears." I would rather say that parents do this ...


0

Philosophy is written in that great book which ever lies before our eyes, I mean the universe, but we cannot understand it if we do not first learn the language and grasp the symbols , in which it is written. This book is written in the mathematical language. (Galileo Galilei). Is this universal language discovered or invented (or both)? Answering this ...


1

I'm actually happy this question popped up in the feed because I'm amazed no one has pointed out the historical changes of the term "science". Unfortunately I don't have the appropriate amount of time to write a full piece of answer, but I'll attempt to draw some general lines. If you consider "science", or moreover the scientific community, as dynamic, ...


0

What seems to be missing in the replies to your question is the acknowledgement that a mathematical structure (a very complicated one, presumably) can be devised so that it encodes all the observed features of the natural world. There is simply no bound on what can be conceived: the phenomenon of concern may be immeasurable (Hilbert spaces), chaotic (water ...


2

Welcome to Philosophy SE. You mentioned that the cosmological argument "crashes and burns" because the existence of God as uncaused or unexplained contradicts one of the premises of the argument. This is the "what caused God?" objection, but it rests on a misreading of the argument. The cosmological arguments put forward by philosophers do not say that "...


2

First of all, as a matter of logic, arriving at a contradiction means that one or more of your assumptions must be false. So, to see what the argument by contradiction proves you have to consider everything that it assumes. So here are some assumptions of the argument: A. Every entity in existence owes its existence to some other entity other than itself (...


0

Nothing will happen. If superdeterminism is true and we prove it, then we are "superdetermined" to prove it. Science and history will contiue to be what they are meant to be. The point is that, if everything is already determined, then we cant do nothing to change it and everything we do is already written. Your question make a simple logic flaws that i see ...


Top 50 recent answers are included