I think that one of the things that will calibrate the agent um through regards to their trust in science just has to kind of learn is that you know and this is a thing which popped up even if he wouldn't have put it exactly as I would put it was he really had like the fundamentals of this idea and to be quite a look. Sciences so to speak a quasi evolutionary process there are lots of people throwing up lots of ideas lots of the time most of the ideas don't survive for good reason occasionally we'll miss one which we should have paid more attention to. We can reasonably hope that eventually we will catch some good valuable new ideas and we will actually build on them.
Everybody talks about the truth, but nobody does anything about it. And to be honest, how we talk about truth — what it is, and how to get there — can be a little sloppy at times. Philosophy to the rescue! I had a very ambitious conversation with Liam Kofi Bright, starting with what we mean by “truth” (correspondence, coherence, pragmatist, and deflationary approaches), and then getting into the nitty-gritty of how we actually discover it. There’s a lot to think about once we take a hard look at how science gets done, how discoveries are communicated, and what different kinds of participants can bring to the table.
Support Mindscape on Patreon.
Liam Kofi Bright received his Ph.D. in Logic, Computation and Methodology from Carnegie Mellon University. He is currently on the faculty of the London School of Economics in the Department of Philosophy, Logic, and the Scientific Method. He has worked on questions concerning peer review and fraud in scientific communities, intersectionality, logical empiricism, and Africana philosophy. He is well-known on Twitter as the Last Positivist.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.