3 ms·
Exactly, if you can falsify theories subject to the assumptions of the simulation, that’s still evidence.
by morelandjs 4y ago
Exactly, if you can falsify theories subject to the assumptions of the simulation, that’s still evidence.
- pdonis 4y ago> if you can falsify theories subject to the assumptions of the simulation, that’s still evidence. No, the falsification itself is not evidence; it's a falsification. Evidence is what you compare the predictions of the simulation to, and then you call the theory falsified if the two don't match.
- kadonoishi 4y agoI spent some years doing computer simulations of cancer screening. The confusion between the output of the simulation, which is not evidence, and real evidence, led me into a nightmare of the Hall of Mirrors, where everything I attempted to learn about cancer screening turned out to be merely a reflection of my own assumptions. Everywhere I turned it was another funhouse mirror, where the computer warped my own ideas because the code I wrote was not a perfect flat reflection of what I meant, because my code introduced distortions, which took immense rigor to avoid. The confusion between real evidence, and the output of my computer simulation which was not evidence but I _confused_ it with evidence, led me down a dark path lost in a labyrinth of funhouse mirrors of my own construction. Listen to pdonis, people.