Re: Solidity is degree of justification (was: Mirror neurons at autopsy)
"therealjoshjordan" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.physics.fabric-of-reality |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--- In [email protected], David Deutsch <david.deutsch@...> wrote: > > In [email protected], Elliot Temple <curi@> wrote: > > > On Dec 18, 2012, at 2:53 PM, David Deutsch <david.deutsch@> wrote: > > > >> (Well, I say we know this -- but that explanation is not nearly as solid as the ones above. > > > > This is justificationism. > > I don't think it's a good idea to extend the meaning of the term 'justificationism' in this way, to include claims that more is known about one subject than another. In chapter 15 of Boi (p 352), David wrote: "[...] rational thinking does not consist of weighing the justifications of rival theories, but of using conjecture and criticism to seek the best explanation [...]" Leaving aside for now the proper definition of the term "justificationism", how is judging theories by degrees of solidity any different from "weighing the justifications of rival theories"?