tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post1315858555951399785..comments2024-03-29T11:13:02.267+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: *If* real science was validated by experience, *then* division of labour drove scienceBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-74210226162819237822012-03-22T21:23:05.908+00:002012-03-22T21:23:05.908+00:00My understanding is that common sense remains, but...My understanding is that common sense remains, but can be and is overwhelmed by other factors - remove those other factors and it would re-emerge intact and un-changed. But in the meantime we have insanity, unpreditability and instability.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-44191654926641044082012-03-22T21:11:08.801+00:002012-03-22T21:11:08.801+00:00"Do we not see people denying that they have ..."Do we not see people denying that they have consciousness"<br /><br />Yes, and they do so - explicitly - contra common sense.ajbhttp://anthonyburgoyne.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-84700355832483171992012-03-22T05:34:41.285+00:002012-03-22T05:34:41.285+00:00Common sense is largely a cultural construct as CS...Common sense is largely a cultural construct as CS Lewis tells us in the discussion of the Doctrine of Unchanging Human Heart (Studies in Words). <br />It depends upon what a society takes as granted--its truisms. <br /><br />For medievals, it was a truism that imperfect must come out of perfect or perfect precedes imperfect. <br /><br />For moderns, it is truism that the complex must come out of simple i.e. the simple precedes the complex. <br /><br />It was not common sense in ancient and medievals that people should be free to form corporations as they think fit and trade as they will. Or that same laws should apply to nobility, clergy and commoners. Or unbelievers. <br /><br />Even in science, the common sense changes. Chesterton prophesied that all that can be denied shall be denied. Do we not see people denying that they have consciousness, that 1+1=2 is not an empirical truth?<br /><br />Father Jaki called Christ the Savior of Science. An unbelieving society would shortly cease to have any Science as it loses common sense since belief in the underlying rationality and order is a consequence of dogmas of a believing societyGyanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09941686166886986037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-59146082931163503362012-03-21T18:17:39.955+00:002012-03-21T18:17:39.955+00:00This also explains why amateur (personal) science ...This also explains why amateur (personal) science can be so effective - the link between scientist, practitioner, end user, is often much stronger.ajbhttp://anthonyburgoyne.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-69995470574424082532012-03-21T12:16:54.299+00:002012-03-21T12:16:54.299+00:00@dearieme - No, that would be absurd!
What I am ...@dearieme - No, that would be absurd! <br /><br />What I am saying is that the *structure* of science (the systematic interlinked description or model) must lead to, be linked to, aspects that are testable by practitioners. <br /><br />By analogy - science is the 'workings' of the calculations - these cannot be tested by practitioners - but the results of the calculations must be such as are testable by practitioners in the experience, and it must be the practitioners that (as individuals) decide whether or not the results are valid. <br /><br />i.e. Medical scientists cannot judge the validity of their research, only its internal, within-science consistency. <br /><br />The validity of medical science must be tested by individual practicing doctors (if the medical science is to be real).Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-9181892796530689792012-03-21T11:57:37.578+00:002012-03-21T11:57:37.578+00:00"...an 'improvement' in cholesterol l..."...an 'improvement' in cholesterol levels (i.e. a lowering on cholesterol levels)": well said. I rarely raised my voice to my research students, but I did sometimes when they wrote or said "improved" when they should have written or said raised/lowered/intensified or whatever.<br /><br />Anyway, is your point that no study should be called "science" unless it holds out the possibility of being tested in application by practitioners?deariemenoreply@blogger.com