Subject:
|
Re: Critical Thinking
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:07:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
684 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:G4wJLA.DAL@lugnet.com...
> http://www.csicop.org/si/9012/critical-thinking.html
>
> Anyone here have reason to disagree with it? It is in
> the context of evaluating paranormal claims, but has
> bearing on a lot of what we've been
> bandying about lately.
What happens if we hold him up to his own standard?
It must be possible to conceive of evidence that would prove the
claim -- 'It must be possible to conceive of evidence that would prove
the claim false' -- false. What evidence would prove that claim false?
More simply, is the statement, "Every true claim is falsifiable"
falsifiable?
Just something to think about...
--
later... Jer
irvinej@accuvera.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Critical Thinking
|
| (...) He didn't say that, exactly. He said every "meaningful" (paraphrasing) true claim is falsifiable and then proceeded to show why non falsifiable claims don't help us in our understanding. (...) Good point but while you're thinking about that, (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Critical Thinking
|
| Digging around, looking for something else, I ran across this rather interesting cite... (URL) here have reason to disagree with it? It is in the context of evaluating paranormal claims, but has bearing on a lot of what we've been bandying about (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
