2 ms·

If one believe it's a human construct and the other doesn't and they decide to study science based on that they will end up with very different results. Further

If one believe it's a human construct and the other doesn't and they decide to study science based on that they will end up with very different results. Furthermore depending on how you understand the world you will be encouraged or discouraged from pursuing various paths. So no it's not just about defining it differently it's about whether you believe red is "out there" or whether it's "in your mind" if you can't see why that's important then that's your problem not mine.

fenomas 9y ago
> If one believe it's a human construct and the other doesn't and they decide to study science based on that they will end up with very different results. Give me an example of an experiment they'll predict different results for and I'll believe you. ;) If there isn't one, then your belief isn't paying rent - and arguing whether red is "out there" is as meaningful as arguing whether Wulky Wilkinson is a post-utopian. > http://lesswrong.com/lw/i3/making_beliefs_pay_rent_in_anticipated_experiences/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/i3/making_beliefs_pay_rent_in_antici...