Re: Poor Darwin


John Wilkins wrote:
> Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> > Ross Langerak wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In science, a theory is an explanation for a set of data.
> >
> >
> > More importantly a scientific theory predicts what data will be measured
> > when the measurement are made under specified conditions. The function
> > of a scientific theory is prediction.
> >
> > Theories do not explain. They model.
> >
> That is an absurd comment. Theories are indeed models and the models are
> indeed explanations of the phenomena they model. Any model will have variables
> bound under it, and those variables are explanatory - they represent entities
> or processes, which explain why we observe the phenomena. In the case of a
> model that postulates unobservable variables, we have discovered something
> about the world - this is how all subatomic particles are discovered.
>
> And *the* function of a theory? Theories have many functions. One of them is
> prediction. Another is retrodiction - explaining why some observed outcome was
> observed. Another is to provide a research program - to identify what is
> covered by the model in order to identify what is not and needs further
> explanation. For example, the Ideal Gas Law breaks down at each end of the
> curve - this is because, as we now know, there are properties of gas molecules
> that cause them to bond at high pressure, and they become plasmas at high
> temperatures. The anomalies are informative.
>

I think this is mostly semantics. Robert was probably reacting
to the oft-quoted "Yes, that explains the data, but it doesn't
explain *why*". The fact is that in science we tend to "explain"
one thing by invoking something else more general and basic. "It rains
because water evaporates. Water evaporates because the kinetic energy
of the molecules exceeds a certain value. This value is determined
by the molecular binding energies....". On and on, until we ultimately
get to the most fundamental physics, at which point we plop down
the best equation to model that physics. When you get to this point,
if someone asks "Why?", you can only answer "Because that's the
way nature is". I would call that a pretty weak "explanation", and
would refer to it rather as a "model".

Personally, I've given some public talks about why intelligent design
isn't science. I normally start out by carefully explaining what
science is and isn't. I say something like "Science isn't about Truth,
it's about finding the simplest model which explains observed phenomena
and predicts future phenomena. It's only as True as the most
precise experiments that have been done".

-jc





> --
> John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
> University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
> "Darwin's theory has no more to do with philosophy than any other
> hypothesis in natural science." Tractatus 4.1122

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: My philosophy of Evolution
    ... I am talking about the phenomena which represents this ... communicates its existence to us or we find a way to observe and measure it ... If there are, indeed, prophets who are not liars, and who have been "sent" ... establishing something through science that is not possible within the game ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Kent Hovinds doctoral dissertation
    ... type of thing that counts as an explanation. ... scientists attempt to understand things. ... I already opffered considerably more evidence than you of your ... you show why faith is incompatible with science. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Naturalism as the Religious Basis of Evolutionism
    ... That isn't enough to do science. ... we carry on looking for an explanation. ... Science assumes that everything it investigates has a natural explanation; ... They say "Show us what can we observe or measure, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Big Bang Theory
    ... science beforehand. ... a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: ... A theory in technical use is a more or less verified or established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena: the theory of relativity. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: What is a software engineer?
    ... provide any explanation of why the experiment "works", ... As to whether this is indicative of some correlation between its theoretical concepts and reality at some level, opinions are divided, from those who claim it gives 'strong evidence' that reality is in fact like science says it is, to those who claim it says nothing at all about the real nature of reality, Its only a means of foretelling how that will behave. ... The question is what is a software engineer? ... You should note that this is why computer *scientists* are such an infernal waste of space. ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)