Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What if I’m wrong? (2023)

behavioralscientist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 294 posts

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#11

Post by aspenmayer »

delichon wrote: post #2

Ptolemy was wrong. But he was wrong with a large pile of actual measurements of celestial bodies, and a falsifiable theory. That made him wrong in the positive sense of wrong in the phrase "not even wrong", where wrong is just the first step of the ladder. I wish I could say the same about Freud, but that ladder is distressingly horizontal.

> "Not even wrong" is a phrase often used to describe pseudoscience or bad science. It describes an argument or explanation that purports to be scientific but uses faulty reasoning or speculative premises, which can be neither affirmed nor denied and thus cannot be discussed rigorously and scientifically. The phrase "not even wrong" is synonymous with "unfalsifiable".[0][1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/sep/19/ideas.g2

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#14

Post by FrustratedMonky »

I actually got a little suckered in, and thought this might be Dennett opening up to being wrong and giving some new account of what he might now think is correct.

Especially after all the debates on free will with Sapolsky.

Instead it ended up being backhanded self complement, more like, "a lot of other great people agree with me, so maybe I'm wrong, but probably not".

"Descartes’s theory of everything is, even in hindsight, remarkably coherent and persuasive. It is hard to imagine a different equally coherent and equally false theory! He was wrong, and so of course I may well be wrong, but enough other thinkers I respect have come to see things my way that when I ask myself, “What if we are wrong?” I can keep this skeptical murmur safely simmering on a back burner."

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#15

Post by nonrandomstring »

aspenmayer wrote: post #9
XorNot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"best-practice" is a specific, over-used term in the tech industry. People instinctively give opinions and say "well best-practice is..." to fortify it against being criticized, and then lean heavily on the fact that if you actually ask them to support that notion then they imply or accuse the questioner of being hostile. "It's best practice" should invite the question of "according to who, in which publications? Wha…

> A weasel word, or anonymous authority, is a word and phrase aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said when in fact only a vague, ambiguous, or irrelevant claim has been communicated. The terms may be considered informal. Examples include the phrases "some people say", "it is thought", and "researchers believe". Using weasel words may allow one to later deny any specific me…

There's a spectrum isn't there, between weasel words that are avoidant and non-attribution which is done out of respect or kindness. News is full of passive prose; "A source claimed yesterday", because anonymous sources need protection. A barrister might say in court; "It has been said that...", not to invite libel or misidentify a witness. Or a teacher might say "It's been brought to our attention that some children..." not to embarrass a kid in front of everyone.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#16

Post by svat »

What is his life's work / major insight that he's referring to here?

> I had found— and partly invented— a prodigious explanation- device that reliably devoured difficulties, day after day. The insights (if that is what they were) that I had struggled so hard to capture in my dissertation and my first book have matured and multiplied, generating answers to questions, solutions to problems, rebuttals to objections, and— most important— suggestions for further questions to ask with gratifying consilience. I just turn the crank and out they pour, falling into place like the last pieces in a jigsaw puzzle. Perhaps my whole perspective is a colossal mistake— some of my critics think so— and perhaps its abundant fruits are chimeras.

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#17

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #14

I actually got a little suckered in, and thought this might be Dennett opening up to being wrong and giving some new account of what he might now think is correct. Especially after all the debates on free will with Sapolsky. Instead it ended up being backhanded self complement, more like, "a lot of other great people agree with me, so maybe I'm wrong, but probably not". "Descartes’s theory of everything is, even in h…

I had an interesting email exchange with Dennett in the 90s. He had just brought out his book "Consciousness Explained". I read it and emailed him a short note saying that I thought the book was mistitled - the contents were an explanation of what we were conscious of not how we could be conscious.

I expected him to write back with some eloquent or witty or pithy defense of the link between the title and the contents, but he just thanked me and said, "yes, now that you put it that way, it probably is the wrong title. Oops, too late."

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#18

Post by bbor »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #14

I actually got a little suckered in, and thought this might be Dennett opening up to being wrong and giving some new account of what he might now think is correct. Especially after all the debates on free will with Sapolsky. Instead it ended up being backhanded self complement, more like, "a lot of other great people agree with me, so maybe I'm wrong, but probably not". "Descartes’s theory of everything is, even in h…

Yeah but he’s engaging seriously with self-doubt. Which I think is admirable. I also find his “explaining away” of the rest of the field tiresome, but I don’t think calling it self-complimentary is necessarily fair. After all, this is a retrospective/polemic, not a revelation of some new discovery

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#19

Post by dekhn »

delichon wrote: post #2

Ptolemy was wrong. But he was wrong with a large pile of actual measurements of celestial bodies, and a falsifiable theory. That made him wrong in the positive sense of wrong in the phrase "not even wrong", where wrong is just the first step of the ladder. I wish I could say the same about Freud, but that ladder is distressingly horizontal.

I think the right phrase here is not 'not even wrong' but 'wrong but for the right reasons' or 'all models are wrong, but some models are useful (possibly by being less wrong'

Re: What if I’m wrong? (2023)

#20

Post by JonChesterfield »

> if this novelty is worth understanding, somebody I trust will soon explain it to me in terms I can readily digest

That's unsound. It prevents learning anything which is not widely known and simply explained.

I don't know the author. All the context I have is the article up to that point where I lost interest. However yes, if all you try to learn are the trivial things everyone agrees on, for some circular definition of "wrong", you won't be wrong.

Bad strategy. High value are things few people know. Highest value are things people know to be true that are not so.

Post reply on HN