Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one
From: mike3 (mike4ty4_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: Double-A: "Re: Hmmm - a robust arguement?"
- Previous message: Jim Black: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 17 Oct 2004 01:25:28 -0700
"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<2s2sbdF1fg74aU3@uni-berlin.de>...
> Paul Draper wrote:
>
> >
> > Alternative-theory flamers: the onus is on you to point accurately to the
> > failing of the theory.
>
> The burden of proof of a theory lies squarely on the one proposing it.
>
> Bob Kolker
Actually, it lies on the person who asserts something about the
theory. If I say "yeah it's right!" then I have to show that it's
right (ie. it satisfies the 5 requirements). If I say, "no it's
wrong!" then I have to show it's failing. If the proposer is cliaming
it's true, then they have to show it satisfies the requirements. If a
critic says it's false they have to point to a VALID reason it's
false.
Again, you're wrong.
- Next message: Double-A: "Re: Hmmm - a robust arguement?"
- Previous message: Jim Black: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
