
Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution - byrneseyeview
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/10/2/text_pop/l_102_01.html
======
curi
_A theory can be verified by a mass of facts, but it becomes a proven theory,
not a fact._

This is a ridiculously bad description of how science and fallibility work.

~~~
webnrrd2k
Well, yes, theories are never proven true in any ultimate sense. But it
explains how people work rather well.

If a theory works time and again to explain something then, eventually, it's
considered proven. For example, Newtonian physics/gravity isn't strictly
correct true, but it still useful. It works to explain things well enough that
it's pretty much the only model 99% of the world will ever need, and, in that
sense, it's considered true.

~~~
curi
The distinction between "theories" which aren't proven true, and facts which
are, is false. Nothing is proven true in an ultimate, certain sense.

That isn't important. But not because if something seems to work a bunch of
times (how many?) then it's true. That isn't a way forward. The way forward is
to focus on what the best available explanation is, and to improve it through
criticism.

~~~
curi
So the pattern over many threads is:

1) article says something dumb

2) i say so briefly. i can't very well always explain in detail when no one
has even expressed interest

3) someone espouses some dumb and imprecise theory in reply, that vaguely
sounds right

4) i point out a reason it's wrong (in this case, there was the "how many?"
question which is a full refutation)

and then 5:

the first comment is downmodded for lack of detail

and the further detail is too nested, and too technical/precise/doesn't have
the "sounds nice" feel to it. and still i keep it brief because the person
didn't show interest in learning.

for another example of the kind of followup i mean, something like "arguments
from the authority of experience are invalid" or "correlation is not
causation". these get downmodded. presumably b/c they are unhelpful or
everyone knows them. except, they are true, and people violate them all the
time.

anyway, does anyone know the solution?

~~~
hugh
Perhaps the solution is a bit of humility. Half the time you think you're
"correcting" somebody it seems that you're actually completely
misunderstanding their point, and half the other half you're just
misunderstanding the issue. The condescending tone doesn't help, either.

~~~
curi
Interestingly, your comment lacks humility. How about quoting to back it up?

