From: oldernow@dev.null   
      
   On 2025-04-01, D  wrote:   
      
   >>> True. It was an example of how one might deduce from the   
   >>> behaviour of a buried corpse, so speculate that dinosaurs   
   >>> are also remains, although fossilized.   
   >>   
   >> Speculation is clearly foundational in "science".   
   >   
   > Theory, discussion, speculation, mental tools, calculation   
   > are all tools of science, just like experiment,   
   > verification and falsification is.   
      
   How do modeling/representation phenomena such as   
   all that you list leapfrog from what might be called   
   "modeling/representation realm" to interact sufficiently   
   directly with an alleged "objective/real world" to say with   
   assurance that their results were indeed derived from said   
   allege "objective/real world"?   
      
   >>> No, because we explain how leaves grow on trees through   
   >>> biology and chemistry, so god is not necessary.   
   >>   
   >> Do you equate "we explain" with "we know"?   
   >   
   > Ahh... moving on to the theory of truth! A very interesting   
   > subject.   
   >   
   > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth#Substantive   
   >   
   > I lean towards the pragmatic theory of truth, but depending   
   > on the subject, I also see some merit in the consensus   
   > theory of truth.   
   >   
   > The pragmatic theory I think goes very well with empirical   
   > evidence, as in, does science allow us to predict events   
   > happening in the physical world, which can be detected.   
      
   Again, how can "empircal evidence" be obtained by tools   
   clearly located firmly in a non-empirical context?   
      
   (I mean, apart from believing they can be, of course....).   
      
   --   
   NPC's dutifully ignored.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)