|
8.0.2.3 Unjustifiable Alternative BeliefsVersion 1.1 August 2014                                  (Previous Version) We can confidently disregard certain alternative conclusions and theories. We discuss many of these in parts 1 to 7. Here in Part 8 we need to appreciate at a high level how we do this, why we can justify our vision of a reasonable global way, and our hope that action is meaningful. Sometimes reason and the evidence show that specific alternative views are false. For instance, Newtonian mechanics, the theory that is based on Isaac Newton’s three laws of motion, works well in most circumstances of our daily lives, but does not adequately explain what we observe at very large or small scales or when the relative velocities are high. Newtonian mechanics is still useful for explaining the motions of cars on roads, but to explain satellite linked mobile phones and GPS systems we need Einstein’s relativity theory. As we discuss in Part 2, some people say a theory is a scientific theory only if there is a potential for some prediction of the theory to be inconsistent with observation or experiment. Much of our scientific knowledge is more a collection of observations than a comprehensive theory, but even some of these we can also reject based on more honest or reliable observations. For instance, in the past some scientists believed that women’s brains were smaller than men’s and that this was ‘proof’ that women were less intelligent and less morally competent than men. In fact more reliable measurements show that the supposed difference in brain sizes is not valid. Quite separate psychological measurements don't show that women are less intelligent, and there is no evidence of superior morality in either sex. Even if women’s brains had been smaller, the implication about women’s abilities is still contradicted by the facts. It is still reasonable to disregard some alternative views even though they could be viable – not contrary to reason or the evidence.  For instance, we can't prove that life is not all a dream, or that other people are real. We accept such conclusions simply because they help us understand what is going on, and our conclusions are consistent with the evidence. In fact, many of our most fundamental beliefs, despite what some scientists may claim, are not scientific, in that the cannot in practice or perhaps in principle be disproven by observation. Though we cannot ‘prove’ that life is not all a dream, or that other people are real, if we don't adopt these beliefs, based on the available evidence, we cannot understand most of our reality, and we have fewer bases on which to make decisions: non-belief in these matters impedes our understanding, and causes distress and harm to ourselves and to others. 8.0.2.3 We can confidently dismiss some alternative
views because they are inconsistent with reason and the evidence, and we
dismiss other alternatives, even though they aren’t inconsistent with reason
and the evidence, when believing them does not help, or actually impedes our understanding
of the world. more (later)
Members can tell us (publicly) what they think of this page. How can we improve it? Enter your comments.
* * * * * * *
|
|
English (English)
We acknowledge the traditional owners and custodians of Country, throughout all colonised lands, and their connections to land, waters and community. We pay respect by giving voice to truth, values and social justice, acknowledging our shared history, and valuing the cultures of first nations peoples.
Copyright © 2008 - 2026 Trevor J Rogers, care of the address shown on this page. All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the copyright owner. Any approved reproduction is permitted only with full attribution of the source, referring to this site and this copyright notice. The moral right of the author is asserted.
Top