a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by JakobVirgil
JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Anti-intellectual attacks on anthropology

So not much about the Sentinelese eh? My argument is not that historians can't know things or sequences they just can't know that one thing caused another. To say otherwise is hubris.





StephenBuckley  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Pretty sure scientists can't know that either. Causality is beyond proof.

JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The way scientists "can't know" is qualitatively different then how historians can't know.

I think technology is a huge example of this. We understand the cause and effect qualities of transistors, wire and spun glass enough for us to have this conversation.

I am not saying historians can not make arguments I am saying that their assertions are largely un-testable. (pending fixing the tardis).

There is a difference between using calculus to predict the motions of the planets and saying that Europe is powerful because it is wide.

Am I wrong?

StephenBuckley  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Yes. Applied economics are proof that you are wrong. Modern political theory are proof that you are wrong.

mk  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm not sure I can agree about modern political theory. The vast knowledge gained from reproducible experimentation makes a very good case for causality. In fact, countless theoretical breakthoroughs have been elucidated by experimentation. However, experimentation in political theory is severely limited in scope and predictive power.

I'd bet my life on the valence of carbon based on atomic theory, but never on any prediction of a political theory, no matter how it was derived.

StephenBuckley  ·  4338 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The tests take longer and it's harder to run them in parallel, but it's just a slower version of the same steps.

mk  ·  4338 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I think that is an argument that cannot be proven, as you could always fault the experiment or the time allowed. It's not that I think that political theory isn't important or worthwhile, but without demonstrable reproducibility, it's just fundamentally different to something like physics.

JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The track records of both of those fields suggest I am right. both of them are at the level of medieval blood letting. But they may be getting better . good article

b_b  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

It is absolutely beyond doubt that physics can prove causality. The transistor was built from first principles, for example. That didn't happen by accident.

JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I think this ordering illustrates my views.

math

physics

chemistry

biology

ecology

sociology/anthropology

political science /economics

phrenology

astrology

homeopathy

Austrian school economics

(notice history is not on the list because it is orthogonal to science. It is a valid and noble pursuit it just is impotent when it comes to causality.)

JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  
This comment has been deleted.
JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  
This comment has been deleted.
JakobVirgil  ·  4340 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I think this ordering illustrates my views.

math

physics

chemistry

biology

ecology

sociology/anthropology

political science /economics

phrenology

astrology

homeopathy

Austrian school economics

(notice history is not on the list because it is orthogonal to science. It is a valid and noble pursuit it just has nothing to do with causality.)