18 Nov 10
Still, students in schools throughout the world must pass examinations on theories that scientists themselves admit are unproven. Why?
The answer is that a theory is accepted not on the grounds of its certitude, but on the grounds that nobody has yet disproved it. "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
This principle forms the basis of modern scientific knowledge. This same principle, ironically, is considered a fallacy in classical philosophy: *argumentum ad ignorantium*, the fallacy of argument from ignorance.
An argument that says something is true because nobody has proved it false, or that something is false because nobody has proved it true, is held to be invalid according to this rule of fallacy.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuArgumentum ad ignorantiam
Still, students in schools throughout the world must pass examinations on theories that scientists themselves admit are unproven. Why?
The answer is that a theory is accepted not on the grounds of its certitude, but on the grounds that nobody has yet disproved it. "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
This princi ...[text shortened]... se because nobody has proved it true, is held to be invalid according to this rule of fallacy.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuAre you trying to say that the scientific community just lets whatever ideas pass into their journals and whatnot?
Still, students in schools throughout the world must pass examinations on theories that scientists themselves admit are unproven. Why?
The answer is that a theory is accepted not on the grounds of its certitude, but on the grounds that nobody has yet disproved it. "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
This princi ...[text shortened]... se because nobody has proved it true, is held to be invalid according to this rule of fallacy.
I believe some scientists have been bought off and others have been ignored but the picture you paint of the sientific community just doesn't really match the reality.
I really dont think scientists are conciously/directly trying to put forward false theories, as you make out.
I dont get why you are so down on the scientific community. I know it has its problems, but there problems everywhere. Much worse ones too.
I, myself, eagerly await the development of Quantum. This revolutionary theory has been around awhile and will not be disproved. Also (as been pointed out on some other threads), quantum seems to validate many eastern spiritual ideas.
The revolutions a comin' ya hear!!
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelplease don't feed the troll
Are you trying to say that the scientific community just lets whatever ideas pass into their journals and whatnot?
I believe some scientists have been bought off and others have been ignored but the picture you paint of the sientific community just doesn't really match the reality.
I really dont think scientists are conciously/directly trying to put ...[text shortened]... , quantum seems to validate many eastern spiritual ideas.
The revolutions a comin' ya hear!!
this thread is still at the beginning, we can avoid it growing if you just ignore the moron.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuYou neither understand the "Argument from ignorance" fallacy nor the scientific method.
Still, students in schools throughout the world must pass examinations on theories that scientists themselves admit are unproven. Why?
The answer is that a theory is accepted not on the grounds of its certitude, but on the grounds that nobody has yet disproved it. "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
This princi ...[text shortened]... se because nobody has proved it true, is held to be invalid according to this rule of fallacy.
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuEdit: "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
Still, students in schools throughout the world must pass examinations on theories that scientists themselves admit are unproven. Why?
The answer is that a theory is accepted not on the grounds of its certitude, but on the grounds that nobody has yet disproved it. "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
This princi ...[text shortened]... se because nobody has proved it true, is held to be invalid according to this rule of fallacy.
No. In science a theory is accepted if it agrees with the observations, and it is rejected if it does not agree with the observations;
Edit: "This principle forms the basis of modern scientific knowledge."
No. This is a false understanding of the concept known as "scientific theory". The basis of modern scientific knowledge is a plexus of philosophy and accurate herenow scientific facts and evidence.
Finally, classical philosophy is merely a tool amongst many; this specific tool is useless in, say, the realm of the quantum manifestations of reality, otherwise the EPR paper would hold
😵
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleThe disconnect here between classical philosophy and science is that the latter is not about necessarily true propositions. If one accepts the principle of falsifiability then scientific theories are never necessarily true.
Edit: "The best anyone can say of a theory is that it has not been disproved."
No. In science a theory is accepted if it agrees with the observations, and it is rejected if it does not agree with the observations;
Edit: "This principle forms the basis of modern scientific knowledge."
No. This is a false understanding of the concept known a ...[text shortened]... the realm of the quantum manifestations of reality, otherwise the EPR paper would hold
😵
18 Nov 10
Originally posted by PalynkaAnd I would add that, even if a specific scientific theory is true herenow, this does not mean that it will be also true at a given future time;
The disconnect here between classical philosophy and science is that the latter is not about necessarily true propositions. If one accepts the principle of falsifiability then scientific theories are never necessarily true.
😵