= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RichardKennaway comments on [LINK] The half-life of a fact - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (9)
This looks like what Daniel Dennett calls a "deepity": something superficially deep that amounts to nothing more than a confusion. In this case, a confusion between map and territory, between "facts" (what we think is true) and "facts" (what is true).
The book might be worthwhile. If our maps keep changing in a more or less predictable way, then maps are themselves a territory which can be studied.
I was thinking more that it would be useful in popularising the fact that facts are contingent but still useful, and that scientific facts changing doesn't mean it's all politics and lies. (I might be a bit hopeful there, of course.)