Sometimes people take this statement about the limitation of scientific knowledge as being defeatist: “If we can't get to the bottom of things, why bother?” This kind of response is misplaced. There is nothing defeatist in understanding the limitations of the scientific approach to knowledge. Science remains our best methodology to build consensus about the workings of nature. What should change is a sense of scientific triumphalism—the belief that no question is beyond the reach of scientific discourse.
Somewhere on my list of things to do is to write a blog post with the deliberately clickbaity (but accurate) title of "This Equation Shows You Can't Quantify Everything"....
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-much-can-we-know/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Where Americans think Ukraine is These are the guesses of 2066 Americans as to where Ukraine is. Only 1 in 6 were correct. Presumably the... -
Hmmm. [The comments below include a prime example of someone claiming they're interested in truth but just want higher standard, where...
-
Of course you can prove a negative. In one sense this can be the easiest thing in the world : your theory predicts something which doesn...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Due to a small but consistent influx of spam, comments will now be checked before publishing. Only egregious spam/illegal/racist crap will be disapproved, everything else will be published.