Excellent, as always. The persistence of prophecies that we are “just around the corner” from realizing conscious, volitional AI are a striking contrast to what has happened in parapsychology.
For over a century, skeptics have said, decade after decade, “you keep promising scientific proof but you’ve never progressed.”
Now, more than a century after the earliest researcher in parapsychology, everything the skeptics have asked for has been given - well replicated experiments with a large effect size, odds against chance of more than a trillion to one.
So, what do the skeptics say? “Ok, you win, parapsychological phenomena are real and valid.”
There appear to be 2 answers, now that psychic research has progressed to the point where results are as good as that in many other areas of science:
(1) We don’t care what results you have. We don’t even need to look at them, because we know that parapsychological phenomena are impossible based on the laws of nature.
(2) “Ok, yes, you’ve proven psi phenomena, using excellent scientific methodology, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Since we know psi phenomena are impossible, the only conclusion is that science is wrong, and we have to change science.”
Right. That’s why I always say that science also is driven by some ideological background. And, in a sense, there is nothing wrong with that. The desire to prove that one’s theory is right against contending theories has always positively made science progress. Things go wrong when we get lost in our bubble and believe our ideological premises to be scientific truths. The essential point is that we always work with some bias and metaphysical assumptions.
Depressing! I just saw this morning an article in The Atlantic stating the there is no research data supporting the effectiveness of placebos. I haven’t seen any skepticism on this subject for a number of years. So I looked more closely and see the author (a political essayist with no background in science) cited one study - one done about 3 years ago which has been roundly criticized (by mainstream and highly qualified scientists) as being very poorly conceived and executed, and within months of its publication thoroughly refuted.
Well, I suspect Big pharma has some interests to perpetuate these myths. The same can be seen with so many news that support narratives of climate change deniers. It is so obvious that the fossil fuel industry stands behind it.
Excellent, as always. The persistence of prophecies that we are “just around the corner” from realizing conscious, volitional AI are a striking contrast to what has happened in parapsychology.
For over a century, skeptics have said, decade after decade, “you keep promising scientific proof but you’ve never progressed.”
Now, more than a century after the earliest researcher in parapsychology, everything the skeptics have asked for has been given - well replicated experiments with a large effect size, odds against chance of more than a trillion to one.
So, what do the skeptics say? “Ok, you win, parapsychological phenomena are real and valid.”
There appear to be 2 answers, now that psychic research has progressed to the point where results are as good as that in many other areas of science:
(1) We don’t care what results you have. We don’t even need to look at them, because we know that parapsychological phenomena are impossible based on the laws of nature.
(2) “Ok, yes, you’ve proven psi phenomena, using excellent scientific methodology, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Since we know psi phenomena are impossible, the only conclusion is that science is wrong, and we have to change science.”
Right. That’s why I always say that science also is driven by some ideological background. And, in a sense, there is nothing wrong with that. The desire to prove that one’s theory is right against contending theories has always positively made science progress. Things go wrong when we get lost in our bubble and believe our ideological premises to be scientific truths. The essential point is that we always work with some bias and metaphysical assumptions.
Hey, did you see McFadden article about Occam’s razor? What is it useful for? But to “reject mysticism, religion, and supernatural forces.” Of course!! 😊 https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nyas.15086
Depressing! I just saw this morning an article in The Atlantic stating the there is no research data supporting the effectiveness of placebos. I haven’t seen any skepticism on this subject for a number of years. So I looked more closely and see the author (a political essayist with no background in science) cited one study - one done about 3 years ago which has been roundly criticized (by mainstream and highly qualified scientists) as being very poorly conceived and executed, and within months of its publication thoroughly refuted.
So yes, lost in bubbles of ideological extremism!
Well, I suspect Big pharma has some interests to perpetuate these myths. The same can be seen with so many news that support narratives of climate change deniers. It is so obvious that the fossil fuel industry stands behind it.