Jump to content

Maths vs Belief


Gratiano
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, cladking said:

I was referring only to actual scientists who devise or execute actual experiments of their own. 

Of course anyone who understands the nature of the experiment or how it was devised might be included. 

Then you seem to have that the wrong way round. Scientists and those with a good understanding of science understand that models are just models and are not the same as the thing being modelled. 

It is only people, like yourself, who have only a loose grasp on science gained from popular articles who don't understand how science really works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Strange said:

Then you seem to have that the wrong way round. Scientists and those with a good understanding of science understand that models are just models and are not the same as the thing being modelled. 

It's the same as saying a map is not the territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, StringJunky said:

It's the same as saying a map is not the territory.

The problem is people live on their maps and are able to see only what can be seen from any point on them and don't even realize it. 

Unless you understand metaphysics then you can't even step back and see your map. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cladking said:

The problem is people live on their maps and are able to see only what can be seen from any point on them and don't even realize it. 

Who are those people? You keep making this claim, but there is no evidence it is true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, studiot said:

Careful what you assume.

Some of us (myself included) have published research papers to our names.

You're taking the comment out of context.

"We mistake the knowledge for understanding.  We isolate bits and parts of nature for study and then believe we understand all of nature; all of reality."

...was a response to;

Quote

 Models do impart understanding - that is they do unless you are using some mad definition - which is quite possible.  They might not impart understanding of some platonic underlying schema - but then nothing does. 

I was essentially suggesting that model formation is a means to format data rather than to understand the underlying principles. 

Even many good scientists who devise important experiment typically understand their reality in terms of models.  This is simply the way things are.  It doesn't have to be this way, it merely is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Strange said:

Who are those people? You keep making this claim, but there is no evidence it is true. 

It's almost all of us. 

We each see the world in terms of our beliefs.  Scientific beliefs are in terms of models. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.