this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
41 points (87.3% liked)

Showerthoughts

29999 readers
596 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AbouBenAdhem 5 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I’d say it’s equally important to figure out what to observe—to arrange experiments that reveal information you don’t yet know, instead of just confirming what you do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

From what would you draw that "what to look at"?

[–] AbouBenAdhem 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

From predictions that would differentiate between competing models.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago

Models drawn from observation, assumedly. Hopefully.

(I think that humans are naturally authoritarian. I think that science is still unnatural to us, as a species.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

The scientific process derives consensus from not observing what is expected in a theory, rather from repeated failure to observe counter examples to what is expected. This is the whole point of "reject the null hypothesis".

Stated more plainly, a scientific theory is solidified when you put yourself in the shoes of your own fiercest critics, and attempt to question your own idea (in good faith) and fail to observe any evidence to substantiate that criticism. A scientific theory, is then put under that scrutiny for real, and gains consensus when others fail to observe any counter examples for themselves.

So to answer "what to look at", the answer is always, what would your competition look at to try to disprove you? Then look at that, to see if there is anything of substance to discredit your own idea, and save everyone the time and your embarrassment in case there are easy counter examples.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago

Turns science into more of a debate than just looking and talking. Quality models through conversational darwinianism.