Monday, May 12, 2008
Question 5
In chapter 4 (p. 40ff.) Taleb talks about the story of the turkey, which was certain that it was safe (until Thanksgiving day). Taleb uses this story to criticize science (i.e. the scientific method), or ‘naïve empiricism’ but does he provide a realistic alternative? Will ‘negative empiricism’ (p. 56) be able to supplant it? Does this change your personal view of the present/future, based on past experience?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I feel like science is well aware of this loop-hole. That's why things are theories and most scientists expect theories to be trumped eventually by a better model of the universe. Einstein trumped Newton and newer models of atoms make the Bohr model look ridiculous. But the previous, erroneous models, were still very useful in helping us progress technologically. No matter how wrong we might be in our assumptions, if they are good enough to allow me to fly around the world in just hours or make America an amazing country for 200+ years, then I can live with the erroneous scientific thinking. With the exception of several interesting thought experiments, I didn't feel like Taleb presented much of anything new (at least in Part 1.)
Post a Comment