HELP WANTED AGAIN.
In Unended Quest Popper questioned the scientific status of evolutionary theory which he regarded as a metaphysical research program.
Some time later he changed his mind and agreed that aspects of evolutionary theory can be tested and hence it is truly scientific. There was something about this on Wik but I can’t find it.
Can someone point me to the Wik piece or any other source that verifies Popper’s change of mind?
UPDATE Sept 2014.
Can someone point me to the Wik piece or any other source that reports or documents Popper’s change of mind?
Try these (these from my “BookMarks” folder titled “POPPER’S MIND-CHANGE on EVOLUTION”):
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA211_1.html
http://ncse.com/…/what-did-karl-popper-really-say…
http://scienceblogs.com/…/2006/06/08/popper-on-evolution/
Thanks Frank, problem solved!
Why do you think verification is possible?
He doesn’t. And you don’t believe justification is possible either, yet you write:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fallible-ideas/conversations/messages/5534
> To answer your question about what would justify signing up: First, I’d want cryonics organizations to be run in a competent and responsible way. Second, I’d want cryonics technology to improve enough to preserve brains well enough to optimistically expect the relevant information (about one’s mind and ideas) to be preserved, and I would want cryonics organizations to provide quality persuasive intellectual explanations on this point. I think those two problems are deal breakers.
Are you going to provide an argument?
On second thought: blog comments here are moderated now. if you want to talk to me about this, do it somewhere else.
Update of the post which prompted Eliot’s question: “Why do you think verification is possible?”
Can someone point me to the Wik piece or any other source that
verifiesreports or documents Popper’s change of mind?You knew Rafe doesn’t think verification is possible and worded his question badly. Why didn’t you just say so instead of making out that he thinks verification is possible?
> On second thought: blog comments here are moderated now. if you want to talk to me about this, do it somewhere else.
oic – your question was a troll because you disrespect this blog.
I checked out FI list and noticed no-one has asked about or criticized the justify comment. Seems something is wrong there.
FI list sucks because no one on it already had and expressed your position? that’s silly. maybe just no one agrees with you. say it yourself if you care so much.
no one agrees with me that you gave a list of criteria that would “justify” something? so what? that’s what you did.
it’s not a one-off thing either. I checked out FI list just now and saw this:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fallible-ideas/conversations/messages/6083
> I did not write out, in full, everything I know about Ari Armstrong. The stuff I did write about, while not a 100% conclusive proof (so what?), is a pretty good indication.
so if you did write everything out in full then 100% conclusive proof?
you say i should comment on FI list if I “care so much” but if you are going to be sarcastic like that and imply you care so little then why should I bother?