[FoRK] A Bayesian framework for faith vs. non-faith

Jeff Bone < jbone at place.org > on > Sun Nov 19 18:31:19 PST 2006

On Nov 19, 2006, at 8:04 PM, James Tauber wrote:

> This anthropomorphizing of science needs to be unpacked a bit. Are  
> you describing how scientists themselves work on their own field,  
> how they view other fields or how non-scientists of a particular  
> "scientific" mindset operate?

I suppose my description of science --- such as it is, intended not  
to be comprehensive but merely illustrative of fundamental  
differences --- is a description of what science might strive to be,  
in the ideal.  In practice (i.e., as academic or professional  
activity) science does of course ground out in "trust networks" and  
other social mechanisms;  for example, every would-be physicist does  
not have to invent all of the relevant mathematics from first  
principles.

However, I would claim that the common adoption of and general  
adherence to the ideal --- minimal set of axioms with willingness to  
modify, minimal arbitrariness criterion --- "hardens" those trust  
networks and makes them, too, more reliable than trust networks based  
on other belief and meta-belief methods and modes.

jb

More information about the FoRK mailing list