Probability theory etc

[MrGecko]

The Philosophy of Religion was one of my A levels :smart:

You've heard / read the transcript of Copleston and Bertrand Russell ??? V. Interesting

 

[grantx]

Mr Gecko,

I haven't. Please provide a reference. I suspect it's a dispute between a believer (Copleston) and an aetheist (Russell).

Russel's History of Western Philosophy is one of my favourite books but beyond this his positions on christianity and what he regards as the social ills and injustices of the 20th century are not particularly illuminating; actually, pretty dull.

Can't find a "pink elephant" reference in the work cited. Probably in another of his works.

Grant.

 

[MrGecko]

Transcript of the Russell/Copleston radio debate

This particular discussion centres on the Cosmological argument.

IIRC Copleston's "Pink elephant" comments were made rather candidly during a conversation between Peter (either Vardy or Singer, I forget) about the Ontological ("That which nothing greater can be conceived"... "Desert Island" argument is how I remember it. It is probably my favourite).

 

[r.w.]

Grant,

thanks for stimulating reply. I am glad we have Taleb behind us now and can discuss more interesting matters.

Rw,

On a non-philosophical and academic level, Popper was always an outsider, a maverick and a reactionary in that he was constantly rebelling against what he regarded as mainstream, Marxist bias in academia (post-revolutionary Russia). Hence his rejection of the Vienna Circle (Wittgenstein, etc) but probably more accurately, they didn’t want him in. His reactionary side is apparent in The Open Society and Its Enemies (against Plato and Marx, for example)

In my understanding, Popper was highly critical of the core tenets of the Vienna Circle and he considered them epistemological idealists – a characterisation they didn’t like - and his famous disagreement with Wittgenstein based on Wittgenstein’s view that there are no genuine problems in philosophy, only linguistic puzzles – something that Popper considered rubbish and wasn’t afraid to say.

I don’t think I read Logic of Scientific Discovery so I’m not familiar with the Postscript (was this an afterthought, revision or correction?) but I did read Conjectures and Refutations in the context of Philosophy of Science.

Logik der Forschung was his first published work that he translated to English in the 50’s. The Postscript was further work intended for a companion volume, but only part of it was published in 1959 and the rest in the 80’s. Now available in three volumes.

Like Hume, Popper was not concerned with the rationalism or justification of the physical sciences but with the foundations of belief in the social sciences (or theology); and for Popper, this centred on Marxism.

Fine. I would consider him an epistemologist as well rather than philosopher of science. But let’s not forget that he spent considerable effort on science, in particular probability and physics, e.g. providing his own interpretation of quantum mechanics and devising an experiment to disprove the Copenhagen interpretation. The experiment may be flawed, but the interpretation is still relevant. So I think it is unfair to consider him as a social/political philosopher first and foremost. Those were perhaps the aspects of his philosophy that attracted most attention in the UK in the 60’s and 70’s, which may account for the misprepresentation.

The irony is, Popper found widespread support in the 1960’s from the French left-wing, social science academics, especially sociologists.

Like being eaten by worms before you’re dead…

Thanks for the reference. I’ve only read Frege (impenetrable).

Coincidentally, I had a couple of drinks Friday with a fellow Taleb basher who mentioned a book that was described as the opposite of Taleb. Might be of interest to some:

Amazon.co.uk: Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers Is the New Way to Be Smart: Ian Ayres: Books

RW

 

[SAINT]

This appeared in the Times just as we were on the subject:

Nassim Nicholas Taleb: the prophet of boom and doom - Times Online