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/
Sister blog of Physicists of the Caribbean in which I babble about non-astronomy stuff, because everyone needs a hobby
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Review : Norse Myths and Tales (II)
As per usual, a single-part post just isn't going to cut it. Having ranted at considerable length against the Norse sagas (of Flame Tree...
-
I've noticed that some people care deeply about the truth, but come up with batshit crazy statements. And I've caught myself rationa...
-
Hmmm. [The comments below include a prime example of someone claiming they're interested in truth but just want higher standard, where...
-
"The price quoted by Tesla does not include installation of the unit. To this needs to be added the cost of installing solar panels to ...
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.