4 ms·
This got me thinking about the difference between "direct" and "indirect" observation. What is the difference? For example: in these experiments, what would "d
by md224 8y ago
This got me thinking about the difference between "direct" and "indirect" observation. What is the difference?
For example: in these experiments, what would "direct" observation be? We have instruments that detect changes in certain variables, and we look for changes that align with our expectations of how a particle affects these variables. But we're not directly observing the particle... we're observing the particle's effects on these variables. So there's always an intermediary between us and the phenomena we're attempting to explore.
It seems to me that this intermediary must exist for all phenomena that cannot be perceived by our 5 senses. So how do we determine when an intermediary is "direct" vs "indirect"?
Looks like it's time for me to revisit Philosophy of Science...
- ianai 8y agoIndeed, modern science is based on lots of prior knowledge. I like to remember that we could still be very wrong about how everything works. That’s what the missing 5/6ths of unexplainable behavior tells us, for one. For two, I hope (personally) that we are wrong about many things. Our current theories lead to some very bleak realities. But, ultimately, it’s important to not become skeptical to the point of tearing down progress. It’s one thing to keep an open mind and consider other options. It’s all too easy for bad actors to sell snake oil as a product of the unknown or unexplainable - or even just attack and destroy progress.