Re:Brown Political Review Interviews Paul Graham
by claudiawerner on Thursday March 12, 2020 @11:27PM
(#22564469)
> That part about what claims sciences can make - has been addressed in statistical significance. No need to invoke philosophy.
This is not what I meant, nor is it what the majority of philosophy of science concerns itself with. I specifically mentioned epistemological basis[4]. Questions such as what deliniates science from pseudoscience, and what empirical investigation tells us about how things really are, are questions in the domain of philosophy[0]. Even so, what rigorous justification deliniates a good statistical significance from a bad one?
>The dark truths are even darker than that. It is what will get you deplatformed.
Sure enough, philosophy studies those too[1][2][3].
>Paul has a very nice article on this somewhere on his blog.
It's hard to see why PG should be considered an authority on philosophy.
This is not what I meant, nor is it what the majority of philosophy of science concerns itself with. I specifically mentioned epistemological basis[4]. Questions such as what deliniates science from pseudoscience, and what empirical investigation tells us about how things really are, are questions in the domain of philosophy[0]. Even so, what rigorous justification deliniates a good statistical significance from a bad one?
>The dark truths are even darker than that. It is what will get you deplatformed.
Sure enough, philosophy studies those too[1][2][3].
>Paul has a very nice article on this somewhere on his blog.
It's hard to see why PG should be considered an authority on philosophy.
[0] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/
[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/
[2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-politics/
[3] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/
[4] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/#WhatKnow