Effing Science: How does it work?

[studiot]

8 hours ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Underdetermination

Interesting you should raise this point.

Within the last two days I posted  a comment about under, over and critical determination in Science, in another thread.

At the end I tried to use the @ function to alert you as I thought you might be interested.

unfortunely the utterly stupid input editor would not accept you and generate the link so I don't know if you saw it.

 

However the point is

Thank you for telling us what philosophers mean by undertermination.

Science and the Scientific Method (ie the subject of thsi trhead) has a quite different definition and usage.

Edited November 30, 2023 by studiot

[AIkonoklazt]

1 minute ago, studiot said:

unfortunely the utterly stupid input editor would not accept you and generate the link so I don't know if you saw it.

 

Nopers, didn't see it. Link?

[studiot]

53 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Nopers, didn't see it. Link?

 

 

On 11/29/2023 at 11:40 AM, studiot said:

 

Understanding "Free Will"  ?

If you are going to understand free will you need to start by realising that this is a compound statement with an inherent tension or partial contradiction.

Furthermore if you are going to fully understand it you cannot pick and choose specific or particular definions alone.

~Fully automatically points to 'understanding' being a range rather than a single instance.

We can then see that both free and will also have ranges of meaning rather than just one.

 

Sometimes it is easier to define the negation or opposite of something and then say that the something is 'everything which is not the negation'.

 

Working along these lines what is the opposite or negation of free will ?

Do we negate one or both terms ?

Opposites to free couls be 'forced', or 'constrained' , which are different.

But 'will' implies a degree of forcing, therby opposing the idea of free.

Constraints are weaker than forcing, to which there is no opposition.

So we come to the idea that free will is anything within a set of constraints.

Physics make considerable use of the idea of 'degrees of freedom'.

On use of degrees of freedom is in making the distinction between a structure and a mechanism.

Structures ( and indeed other systems) can also be what is known as overdetermined.

Mechanisms are where a structure is underdetermined, so has one or more degrees of freedom, so is 'free' to take up a range of positions.

Does the mechanism therefore possess 'free will ?

 

Note for @Alkonoklazt  Computer systems and programs also conform to this underdetermined/overdetermined/uniquely determined  classification.

 

Don't know why the @function is not working properly ?

[AIkonoklazt]

2 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

 

I see, it's that thread.

let me try to tag myself... @AIkonoklazt well, it works for me.

Actually, I think I know. the second letter in my handle is "i" and not "L". AI iconoclast, An iconoclast regarding AI, har-har.

[studiot]

13 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:

Actually, I think I know. the second letter in my handle is "i" and not "L". AI iconoclast, An iconoclast regarding AI, har-har.

Thanks, I'll try to remember that.

New fangled fonts are a nuisance like that.

Your linked Plato article reminds me of the convex hull in a linear programming exercise.

[GeNie.]

Hello - I'm posting here as I'm not sure where else to post at this moment. I'm a new member and I've joined to start a discussion/debate about my new model of the universe. Yes this is a bit of a plug for it, and I'm aware that the site doesn't like shameless spamming so I won't post any link or the title of it here. Could someone be kind enough to please let me know where is the best thread to have this debate or if I'm allowed to start a new thread detailing my model's perspective and interpretation of the universe. Thank you.

Essentially this is what my model does: It is a philosophical approach that fully resolves the duality of light and has exact definitions of time, matter and energy, which reveal our true reality. It also explains how string theory fits in with quantum mechanics and indeed all of physics, including gravity – all reasoned in plain English using logic and natural progression of base dimensional interactions.

Of course there's an awful lot more to it that this but I'll stop here as I don't want to bore everyone with a wall of text.

 

[iNow]

51 minutes ago, GeNie. said:

Could someone be kind enough to please let me know where is the best thread to have this debate or if I'm allowed to start a new thread

Find the Speculations section.  This is the pinned post at the top of it: