Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Mikee

Regulars
  • Content Count

    224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Mikee

  1. criticism presupposes creation. the over-emphasis on criticism is not warranted.
  2. I have yet to see a reason why Popper's logical negativism should be taken seriously and Curi hasn't explained what Popper's theory of concepts is. A lot of talk and vagueness
  3. "You get rid of all your prejudices and biases and empty your mind and then you read the answers straight FROM the observation data." I see you repeat Popper's bad scholarship on this issue. The rest of your post is an exaggeration of the role that criticism plays.
  4. "if you see 3 apples on a table, that rules out the table being empty. The evidence can be used (via some thinking and ideas) to rule something out. Not only that, it rules out all numbers of apples besides 3 being on the table. So you can conclude the one remaining possibility: there are 3 apples on the table." Curi recognizing nothing else is there does not require a systematic ruling out of the particular existents that are absent. Broad abstractions such as "all" and "anything" cover all that is substantive, omitting every particular and specific measure, and requiring only that the
  5. I think nicholas Dykes illustrated some similarities at the end of his critique of Popper
  6. Popper said that repetitive induction doesn't work while other rationalists have called it an outright logical fallacy. Also there seems to be an over-emphasis on the importance of criticism at the expense of creation and analysis, or of observation and experiment and that comes dangerously close to both scholasticism and skepticism as well as to the fashionable view that all research is just discussion. After all, negative truths are more plentiful and thus cheaper than positive ones.
  7. As far as I can tell, Popper does not understand Bacon
  8. What induction supports the idea one would have to throw out 80%? Popper overturned induction by enumeration. Rand did not subscribe to enumeration
  9. Popper wants "scientific method" to mean whatever scientists do and then turns around and says that scientists form conjectures and ignores all the integrations that make any conjecture possible.
  10. I don't see how conjectures and refutations are a strength of his epistemology or criticizing enumerative induction and then telling us that induction is a myth is supposed to be a strength. That second one is a serious shortcoming of his epistemology.
  11. Popper believed that there was no logic to concept-formation, and that such a logical reason would be a myth, for the same reasons as induction formation is. He saw the tie between concepts and induction, and denied that there was any logical sense to it. He also didn't understand nor accept higher levels of inductive theory like Baconian Induction or even Arsistotle and so he thinks he's left with conjectures which are tentative and shaky. Interestingly enough, Francis Bacon never took up the essentials out there vs no essentials debate.
  12. as I understand Popper, he only criticizes enumerative induction, but doesn't appear to know or consider the theories of induction upheld by the likes of Bacon, Herschel, or Whewell. Those three employed not only enumerative inference, but also analogical and eliminative reasoning as part and parcel of the method of induction, and therefore of discovering causes. Popper didn't even think forming concepts was a logical process: he believed it was fine and well when by the concept "dog," we meant dogs in the relation of some spatial-temporal relationship, such as the dogs in Battery Park, and ul
  13. speaking of a threat to the USA, where does stealth jihad fit into this? is it even a legitimate thing?
  14. i think its a question of whose more consistent and the so-called "moderates" are just inconsistent about their religion. I don't think they're the tail that wags the dogs.
  15. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324049504578543250466974398.html
  16. what about genetically modified seeds? I don't think Monsanto can patent the sequence of nucleotides itself but I imagine the method of inserting the sequence into the seed's DNA might be (or is already). So I guess my broad question is: should the genes be patentable?
  17. here is stephan's arguments against IP, if anyone is interested: http://c4sif.org/resources/
  18. Remember kids, investigating hurt feelings on the Internet is more important than dealing with domestic terrorism.
  19. the extremist interpretations highlight the broader point that Islam is a motivator of a vast range of actions, including attempts to destroy the enemies of Muslims in holy war. It also shows that mysticism allows the religious follower to play out his actions with all cards "wild."
  20. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
  21. Martial law has been declared in the USA many, many times. It was not, however, declared in Boston or its environs. Stay grounded.
  22. hmm, I'm not sure I see the logic behind the so-called market anarchy position. sounds quite similar like anarcho-capitalism
  23. I think some differentiate themselves rather well: http://www.ayubhamid.com/q-a-a/609-sufism-vs-salafismwahabism
  24. http://imamluqman.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/the-islamophobia-charade-american-muslim-leaders-just-dont-get-it/
  25. Here is a link to a critique of Rand's theory of IP rights: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1117269
×
×
  • Create New...