3 ms·
If science had no methodology, it would hardly be able to produce results? Of course it has and people reading "some Popper" in high school, evidently without
by Loquebantur 4y ago
If science had no methodology, it would hardly be able to produce results?
Of course it has and people reading "some Popper" in high school, evidently without understanding any of it, exemplifies my point.
(By the way, evolution does not mean constant change of "everything", but gradual adaptation with most stuff staying constant)
The scientific method is a learning algorithm designed to discern truth. Claiming that was "of very limited use in most jobs" shows all kinds of things, it doesn't say anything about its obviously paramount importance.
- staunton 4y agoAll that your comment says is that you disagree and think I'm stupid. Care to offer any object level arguments? For example, do you think making each university student take three lectures of philosophy of science would be better than the current system? What would it achieve and why do you think that? Did you learn something from reading and understanding Popper that you didn't know previously and that helped you in doing something you cared about?