Tedlock lays out a bunch of principles to come to correct conclusions. One of the principles is being a fox that uses multiple chains instead of trying to use one correct chain that rests on a foundation based on which other beliefs can be logically deduced.

Missing the point. The point is how their conclusions are verified.

Holding a belief because of a chain of logic has little to do with the principle of empricism.

Logic is implicit in empricisicm because the idea that contradictions are false is implicit in the idea of disproof by contradictory ev... (read more)

Logic is implicit in empricisicm because the idea that contradictions are false is implicit in the idea of disproof by contradictory evidence.

I think Science and Sanity lays out a framework for dealing with beliefs that doesn't categories them into true/false that is better than the basic true/false dichomity.

If you have other reasoning show it. Otherwise that was an irrelevant nitpick.

I care more about what Science and Sanity called semantic reactions than I care about presuppositions.

Basically you feed the relevant data into your mind and then y... (read more)

Open thread, Jul. 25 - Jul. 31, 2016

by MrMind 1 min read25th Jul 2016133 comments

3


If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post, then it goes here.


Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)

3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.

4. Unflag the two options "Notify me of new top level comments on this article" and "