|
John,
It's too bad your
author didn't consult a simple dictionary (like the Concise Oxford, e.g.).
He certainly has a novel comprehension of the idea of induction. Perhaps
it due to following blind guides that explains part of problem Social Crediters
have in persuading their occasional auditors? From my own point of view,
making an issue over inductive, deductive, hypothetico-deductive (the most
nearly related to successful science, it seems) is not the productive way
forward, so let's not make this a tempest in a teapot.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 6:38
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy of
Human Effort
Sorry. My comment about Sherlock Holmes comes from a scientific
source. Biological Sciences "blue" version, "Molecules to Man". A bit
dated now, but contains one of the vest explanations of Baconian-inductive
reasoning I have seen.
Set up a hypothesis and attempt to destroy it inductively be checking
against reality. If you succeed, have the honesty to scrap it and look
for an other, an aspect yet to be learned by macro-economists.
Regards. John R.
From: "Peter Haines" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 08:10:24
+1300
Howdy Keith,
I though your choice of a pro-psuedo-science
anti-Bible example was rather unfortunate. The whole Bible was a detterrent
to Marxist theories of the 19th century which was also a more complete
understanding of how mankind should live in this world, so
what?
I notice the thoroughbred horse industry hasnt
been put out of stride due to theories that a horse might breed a
catipillar or a fish.
Science like truth isnt deterremined by
popularity or repetition. Same thing goes for scripture.
I would suggest that the funniest side of man
has been in the way he has handled science and scripture and theories about
them, even funnier than economics. As I said it was unfortunate you
chose it.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 3:03
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy
of Human Effort
Since no one else has come forward to correct
John's misconceptions about inductive versus deductive reasoning, I
contradict even though my resources for carrying through are still a bit
feeble.
I agree with John that just how Douglas came
upon his ideas and analysis is not critical in evaluating how well they
work.
But to say that Sherlock Holmes represents
inductive thinking is to get things in reverse. The Holmes stories
are examples of deductive logic. Inductive reasoning is of the kind
that infers from repetitive instances a rule that the instances will
continue to recur, because it is a law of nature. It is the kind of
reasoning that led the authors of Genesis to infer that species breed true
because God designed them that way and therefore needed to save them in
the Ark. This kind of thinking was a deterrent to acceptance of more
complete theories of species and their evolution in the 18th and 19th
centuries.
Keith Wilde
---- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 6:59
PM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] Tragedy
of Human Effort
Believe it or not, the best example of inductive reasoning comes from
the Sherlock Holmes novels.
Collect date, organise it to make it better understandable, get rid
of the obviously wrong answers, and go and have a good sleep, por play a
violin, or indulge in hectic sport, or... The subconscious mind will
come up with ideas. Treat each destructively to see if it can be
eliminated. The one that can't be is probably the best, until new
data requires it to be modified. It doesn't matter a stuff where
Douglas' analysis comes from or what are its likely causes.
Treated inductively it remains by far the best explanation of events
last century.
And I believe the various different definitions of money invented by
orthodox economists were attempts to get away from it, but surprisingly
each seems to confirm it more.
Refgards. John
R.
From: Triumphofthepast@aol.com
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: [socialcredit] Tragedy
of Human Effort
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:04:52
EST
"It can be tested inductively in that it explains events over
the last century that are inexplicable using the alternative. . .
. Nothing is proved by induction. But the opposite stands
clearly disproved." (Joh n)
That's what I said, I think.
However, I thought it worth taking some trouble to identify (1) What
is the phenomenon to be explained? and (2) What exactly IS the
hypothesis?
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Shop ‘til you drop at XtraMSN Shopping
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Shop ‘til you drop at XtraMSN Shopping
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
