Date: 2010-02-27 05:49 pm (UTC)
Well, partly that is my response!

But I haven't found much of what I've read very edifying. Some people accuse paradigms of being relativism, focusing on the concept of incommensurability and claiming that it weakens the concept of independent scientific truths since concepts are only evaluable for truth value within paradigms and not between them. Others strenuously insist that it isn't like that at all, that incommensurability doesn't mean there can't be means for comparing paradigms one to the other and choosing the best one (this makes sense to me because certainly that's what physicists actually do - pick the model that's appropriate for the problem). But if there is a basis for choosing between paradigms, what's the big deal?

I was a lot more comfortable with Popper.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
No Subject Icon Selected
More info about formatting

Profile

koganbot: (Default)
Frank Kogan

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789 101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 20th, 2025 12:24 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios