4 ms·
P-values are a sub-optimal but okay-ish of quantifying a Popperian hypothesis (a designed-to-be-refutable conjecture). The mathematics is not the problem, the p
by thanatropism 7y ago
P-values are a sub-optimal but okay-ish of quantifying a Popperian hypothesis (a designed-to-be-refutable conjecture). The mathematics is not the problem, the problem is carving science (which in my view (and Quine's and others's) is pretty much defined by the unity of science) in testable morcels.
None of the great achievements of science (Newton, Darwin, Mendeleyev, etc.) were obtained on the basis of Popperian demarcationism/conjectures-and-refutations -- they were obtained by positing a large framework and patching together the empirical case for it.
- lonelappde 7y agoYour great achievements in science exclude all real world applications (engineering, pharmaceuticals, etc), where the critical details of a hypothesis don't fit on a t-shirt
- thanatropism 7y agoNote that I said "science", not "engineering". Engineering is driven by usefulness and profit. Falsificationism isn't a stupid idea; it's even useful at a personal improvement level. But pharma or materials research use it because it tends to lead to good results, not because it's the very definition of what's worthwhile knowledge.
- Quekid5 7y agoTurns out that once you invent a system for "acceptance" (p < 0.05 or whatever), people will game it. Who knew?