From 0f0bcb8fb8813ac812becd8f4f515c10acae458f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: shockrah Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 21:28:38 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] new personal section for notes that i write more often than other stuff --- notes/against-method.md | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) create mode 100644 notes/against-method.md diff --git a/notes/against-method.md b/notes/against-method.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..efb6b7e --- /dev/null +++ b/notes/against-method.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +# Observations & Connections Based on Recent Things Around Me + +A video from _Periodic Videos_ comes to mind wherein they tells a story about someone that tried to make a _mini-nuclear reactor_ in their kitchen. +The tone of the speaker in the video is in some ways mocking the guy for trying to do this in their own home and not in a lab. +Some believe that he [reactor-guy] was trying to split atoms and so he used some elements in a mix but it went wrong and blew up his stove-top. + +> _What if he made a great discovery?_ + +When asked about this the speaker [speaker-guy] mentions that reactor-bro shouldn't be doing this in his home because its not safe and could kill him (reminder that battery engineers complain the same about home power cell diy'ers [see: muh safety argument]). + +There's also random clips of nuclear testing demonstrations from the 50's which are seemingly randomly thrown in as if to insinuate that reactor-bro was trying to make or bomb or could have _nuked'd_ himeself. +It seems a bit out of place and weird. + +PDF2LEFT: states about the epistemological doctrine of classical scientists in history: "who works in a particular historical situation must learn how to recognize error and how to live with it". Going on to say that they need a "_theory of error_ in addition to the _certain and infallible_ rules which define the approach to the truth. +Further: To develop a theory of error is to create an (likely unchanging) _theory of error_ is to riddle that same theory with historically sourced error. +In other words the theory itself is not free from the very thing that it describes as a problem to scientific development. [see observational bias, infinitesimal regression or observation] + +# Something about a form of indoctrination I thought was cool + +> Almost everyone now agrees that what looks like a result of reason - the mastery of a language, the existence of a richly articulated +perceptual world, logical ability - is due partly to indoctrination, partly a to a process of growth that proceeds with the force of natural low + +