3 ms·
Yup yup yup. Glad someone brought this up. It would take a lot to prove that they actually had good foresight since it’s so likely that they just happened to b
by pizlonator 6y ago
Yup yup yup. Glad someone brought this up.
It would take a lot to prove that they actually had good foresight since it’s so likely that they just happened to be the ones who guessed right out of a large population of equally well informed people who guessed lots of other things using similar reasonings.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y agoI think it's probably a strength of science that at any one time there's at least one person yelling about the dangerous of any possible event. It's also a strength that, as in the case of the LHC, the people who were shouting "this will cause a black hole" were drowned about by the ones who were being more realistic.
- ianai 6y agoThe philosophy of science precisely prefers knowledge which gives falsifiable, testable theories. A hypothesis indicating every possible outcome with little differentiation is worthless.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> The philosophy of science precisely prefers knowledge which gives falsifiable, testable theories. Knowledge doesn't give falsifiable, testable theories. Falsifiable, testable theories give knowledge. That's why the philosophy of science prefers them.