From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 17 2003 - 15:32:39 GMT
David said:
> So Matt, what are scientists doing when they do experiments and falsify
their theories?
>
> Matt:
> In the vocabulary I was using? They are causing themselves to have
beliefs over and over again in the attempt to be able say something which
will allow them to predict when they will be caused to have that belief
again. In another vocabulary, they are going back and forth from theory to
praxis and praxis to theory. In still another vocabulary, they are muddling
through as they triangulate themselves with the experiment's data, the
scientific community, and their own hypothesis.
David M: I have my own ideas, but I am not sure what you say sounds anything
like a scientific experiment.
OK imagine a test for ether. We construct an experiment that makes sense to
most of the science community,
if we get result A we have no evidence to contradict our ether theory, if we
get result B it falsifies our theory. What
is the status of the data for you? I.E. what is its status in the discursive
community?
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT" <mpkundert@students.wisc.edu>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:21 PM
Subject: Re: MD When is an interpretation not an interpretation?
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 17 2003 - 15:36:04 GMT