4 ms·

The presence of complex equations does not determine science-ness. Arguably a science should feature theories with some ability to predict behaviour observed i

by shoo 6y ago

The presence of complex equations does not determine science-ness. Arguably a science should feature theories with some ability to predict behaviour observed in the world, and those theories should be falsifiable. Some offshoots of theoretical physics that generate large parameter spaces of non-testable mathematical models packed with complex equations are arguably not science (string theories...)

currymj 6y ago
auction theory is regularly tested by people running auctions with billions of dollars at stake. of course the assumptions of the theory are never perfectly met in the real world, and things can get quite messy. but for instance, the theory predicts that certain kinds of auctions should fail quite badly, which has happened; and it gives prescriptions for better types of auctions, which have resulted in more revenue.
prionassembly 6y ago
That's a contemporary definition of science deeply rooted in a specific philosopher of science (Popper). There was nothing falsifiable about Newton or Darwin. They were predictive (Darwin to a lesser extent) and, more importantly, they fit, like a puzzle. Falsifiability is a good rule of thumb, like Occam's razor, to tell apart obviously pathological research (this possibly includes particle and high-energy physics); but the point of science is the unity of science. If you're a believer in science, you have to believe there's true knowledge to be had (however unobtainable); this true knowledge has to be a single thing, a single puzzle to piece together. However inefficiently and plagued by politics, economics is doing a bit of that. Not long ago we were thinking that it should be replaced in favor of psychology, which is closer to the matter of human behavior. But just look at how psychology is doing.

4 ms·

The presence of complex equations does not determine science-ness. Arguably a science should feature theories with some ability to predict behaviour observed i

by shoo 6y ago

currymj 6y ago
auction theory is regularly tested by people running auctions with billions of dollars at stake. of course the assumptions of the theory are never perfectly met in the real world, and things can get quite messy. but for instance, the theory predicts that certain kinds of auctions should fail quite badly, which has happened; and it gives prescriptions for better types of auctions, which have resulted in more revenue.
prionassembly 6y ago
That's a contemporary definition of science deeply rooted in a specific philosopher of science (Popper). There was nothing falsifiable about Newton or Darwin. They were predictive (Darwin to a lesser extent) and, more importantly, they fit, like a puzzle. Falsifiability is a good rule of thumb, like Occam's razor, to tell apart obviously pathological research (this possibly includes particle and high-energy physics); but the point of science is the unity of science. If you're a believer in science, you have to believe there's true knowledge to be had (however unobtainable); this true knowledge has to be a single thing, a single puzzle to piece together. However inefficiently and plagued by politics, economics is doing a bit of that. Not long ago we were thinking that it should be replaced in favor of psychology, which is closer to the matter of human behavior. But just look at how psychology is doing.