Originally posted by amolv06Yes it is. In principle in the next weekend I intend to re-start it. If you like the history of physics and mathematics check out my other blog too: http://physicsfromthebottomup.blogspot.com/
Yea but rigged hilbert space sounds cooler.
Adam, is that link in your profile your blog?
In principle both of them will have a new life.
Originally posted by adam warlockVery interesting. At the moment I have no computer, and its hard to look through the blog on my mobile, but when I manage to get my computer back (hopefully this weekend) I will subscribe. I noticed one of the books advertized on your blog is the structure of the scientific revolution by Khun. I would be interested to hear your tboughts on that book when and if you ever have a chance. It is probably one of the most cogent critiques of the scientific method I have ever read, but for some reason it doesn't sit well with me. I would like to hear what others have to say.
Yes it is. In principle in the next weekend I intend to re-start it. If you like the history of physics and mathematics check out my other blog too: http://physicsfromthebottomup.blogspot.com/
In principle both of them will have a new life.
Originally posted by amolv06I will talk about it in my next post on Exploring the Mountain. As soon as I post I'll let you know in this thread.
Very interesting. At the moment I have no computer, and its hard to look through the blog on my mobile, but when I manage to get my computer back (hopefully this weekend) I will subscribe. I noticed one of the books advertized on your blog is the structure of the scientific revolution by Khun. I would be interested to hear your tboughts on that book when and ...[text shortened]... but for some reason it doesn't sit well with me. I would like to hear what others have to say.
Edit: Hopefuly in the future Palynka will also contribute the blog with his knowledge in economics. So there's another good reason for you to check it out.
Originally posted by amolv06It will serve as a more well put introduction to the historical part of the blog since I'll be doing the history part of within Kuhn's paradigm of History of Science.
I am looking forward to it
I don't think the the text will be too long. But what parts of The Structure of Scientific revolutions you have more disagreements with?
I think you should read Against Method. It's a lot more close to my position of the history/philosophy of science (read physics).
I'll be looking forward to your comments to the post in question when it appears in the blog.
Sorry I took so long to get back to you.
1.) Khun's book seems to reduce the contributions of "normal science," into nothing more than a build-up for the next revolution.
2.) Khun's incommensurability concept seems downright incorrect in many ways.
3.) Khun maintains that falsifiability of a paradigm is only important when a new one has been developed to replace the old one. This, again, seems incorrect to me.
4.) Khun maintains that it is our perception of what we see that influences in which way science goes. Though science is a pursuit of objective truth, according to Khun we can only experience the truth subjectively. This seems largely contrary to experience, as science becomes increasingly accurate. Either this accuracy is subjective, which I don't see how it can be, or in some way, shape, or form we are getting increasingly closer to ascertaining some objective truths.
There are probably others, though it's been a while since I've read the book.