Re: Useless memes

From: Robert Logan (logan@physics.utoronto.ca)
Date: Sat May 13 2000 - 00:46:46 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Fwd: Did language drive society or vice versa?"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA02749 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 13 May 2000 00:48:43 +0100
    Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 19:46:46 -0400
    From: Robert Logan <logan@physics.utoronto.ca>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Useless memes
    In-Reply-To: <391BEF63.13CB113F@mediaone.net>
    Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.4.10.10005121933180.9489380-100000@helios.physics.utoronto.ca>
    Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Fri, 12 May 2000, Chuck Palson wrote:
    >
    > I agree with this. I think sometimes its easier to take the literal
    > meaning of something and assume that it is therefore stupid. This is a
    > general mistake - as in when Dawkins and others "prove" that religion
    > is false - without taking into account the entire effect of that meme.

    The claim that anyone can prove religion is false is itself false. The
    problem with Dawkins proof is that his fallacy is wrong. :-)

    Religions are not true or false in the sense of logic - they are belief
    systems. They are based on axioms which can not be true or false. An
    assumption is an assumption is an assumption which is neither true or
    false. If one postulates the existence of a God on the basis of faith then
    that God exists in that persons belief system and effects their behaviour.

    I have already shared with this list my non-probativity theorem in which I
    claim science can not prove anything. It goes as follows:

    The Science Non-Probativity Theorem

    Axiom: A proposition must be falsifiable to be a scientific proposition or
    part of a scientific theory.

    Axiom: A proposition can not be proven true and be falsifiable at the same
    time. [Once proven true, a proposition can not be falsified and, hence, is
    not falsifiable.]

    Theorem: A proposition can not be proven to be true by use of science or
    the scientific method.

    Proof: If a proposition were to be proven to be true by the methods of
    science it would no longer be falsifiable. If it is no longer falsifiable
    because it has been proven true it can not be considered as a scientific
    proposition and hence could not have been proven true by science. Q.E.D.

    In the spirit of the Science Non-Probativity Theorem, we can not be
    certain that this line of reasoning is absolutely valid or true. After all
    we have just used the theorem, a syntactical element of the language of
    mathematics to establish a proposition about the language of science. Our
    theorem is not scientifically valid but as a result of mathematical
    reasoning we have created a useful probe; one that can lead to some
    interesting reflections and insights into the nature and limitation of
    science. If it helps scientists and the public, who tend to accept the
    authority of science more or less uncritically, to adopt a more humble and
    modest understanding of science, it will have served its purpose.

    All that science can do is to follow its tried and true method of
    observing, experimenting, generalizing, hypothesizing and then testing its
    hypotheses. The most that a scientist can do is to claim that for every
    experiment or test performed so far, the hypothesis that has been
    formulated explains all the observations made to date. Scientific truth is
    always equivocal and dependent on the outcome of future observations,
    discoveries and experiments. It is never absolute.

    A scientist who claims to have proven anything is being dogmatic. Every
    human being, even a scientist, has a right to their beliefs and dogmas.
    But it does not behoove a person who claims to be a rational scientist and
    who claims that science is objective and universal to be so absolute in
    their beliefs and in the value of their belief system, science.

    If you would like the entire paper email me and I will send it to you.

    Bob Logan
    ****************************************************************************
    * Robert K. Logan - Assoc. Prof. of Physics - University of Toronto *
    * 60 St. George Street - Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A7 - Canada *
    * e-mail: logan@physics.utoronto.ca *
    * phone: (416)978-8632 or 652-2570 or 927-9200 fax: (416)927-7077 *
    * Author of: The Fifth Language: Learning a Living in the Computer Age *
    ****************************************************************************

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 13 2000 - 00:49:06 BST