Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science

From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 01/25/05 

Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:00:38 -0500

Albert wrote:

> Indeed. It is, as you pointed out, only evidence. Proof is only
> possible in mathematics.

In the ideal instance. In the real world, proofs have become so long and
involved that the question of their correctness is an empirical issue.
Only in Platon's realm would a mathematical construct be pure and right.
That fact that proofs are carried out by error prone humans introduces a
genuine empirical issue as to whether a "proof" is really a proof.

There is an irreducible empirical aspect to the question of whether a
particular -claimed- proof is indeed a proof. See the history of Wile's
two proofs of FLT. The first one was wrong (an error was actually
exhibited) and the second was -declared to be right- by a committee,
since they could not find any errors.

Bob Kolker