Jorge Garibay > Recent Status Updates

"science is full of lacunae and contradictions, that ignorance, pigheadedness, reliance on prejudice, lying, far from impeding the forward march of knowledge may actually aid it and that the traditional virtues of precision, consistency, "honesty", respect for facts, maximum knowledge under given circumstances, if practiced with determination, may bring it to a standstill."

"science is full of lacunae and contradictions, that ignorance, pigheadedness, reliance on prejudice, lying, far from impeding the forward march of knowledge may actually aid it and that the traditional virtues of precision, consistency, "honesty", respect for facts, maximum knowledge under given circumstances, if practiced with determination, may bring it to a standstill."

On the limitations of Popper's research, Lakatos adapts it through "in my conception, criticism does not -and must not- kill as fast as Popper imagined. Purely negative, destructive criticism, like refutation or demonstration of an inconsistency does not eliminate a programme. Criticism of a programme is a long and often frustrating process and one must treat building a programme leniently."

On the limitations of Kuhn's research, Lakatos argues a counterpoint through "the reconstruction of scientific progress as a proliferation of rival research programmes and progressive and degenerative problem-shifts gives a picture of the scientific enterprise which is in many ways different from the picture provided by its reconstruction as a succession of bold theories and their dramatic overthrows".

I like it.

On what counts as science or pseudo, arguing that science can predict events for which we didn't have the means to confirm yet, and pseudo can't: "Has for instance, Marxism predicted a stunning novel fact successfully? Never! It predicted the absolute impoverishment of the working class. It predicted the first socialist revolution would take place in the industrially most developed society" Lol happening rn.

Interesting criticism of idealism, materialism, existencialism, racionalism, etc, even if Rusell shows his own biases.

This book makes me think that looking too deeply into any of these theories might be pointless as there will always be fallacies due to our particular contexts and resulting ignorance of an 'absolute' reality.

Not a tough read, but several concepts need to be reread to grasp them fully.

Really interesting.

Bradbury nails the wrongful disregard of humans towards every other lifeform we tend to consider inferior simply because they're different. Be it people of colour, animals or even plant life.

He also points out a dissonance between science and religion, which has caused more separation when it could've created union.

Fantastic read, anxious to finish it.

"Even small acts of forgiveness always have significant ramifications at a personal level. Even small acts of forgiveness contribute to one's sense of trust in oneself and the potential of others; they contribute to a human spirit that is fundamentally hopeful and optimistic rather than pessimistic or defeated: they contribute to knowing oneself as potentially powerful people who can choose to lovingly create"

"Tú tienes como enemigos a cuantos has ofendido al ocupar el principado y pierdes también a los amigos que te ayudaron a adquirirlo, al no poder satisfacerlos en la manera que ellos desean."