 Originally Posted by tommo
Hm ok. I think this is coming from the abstract nature of my argument.
Take, for example swans. We know they are almost always white, but black when born.
There may be an occasion where a swan is born brown.
But it doesn't mean that the whole idea of the process is wrong. Because we would know WHY the swans are black, and become white.
Just because occasionally there is a deviation in the data, does not mean it will continue to become more apparent.
And there's no reason it would, because the underlying mechanism is the same; the swans have some sort of pigment the causes the colours or whatever it is).
And it doesn't mean that a new idea or theory should be sought out. It just means that the current one needs to be expanded upon. i.e Sometimes, and very rarely, the pigment mutates and causes them to be born brown.
This observation rests on a dynamical process that changes dramatically with time, natural selection. If some environmental factor starts killing off white swans while brown swans stay camouflaged or something, swans will normally be brown while some mutations may be blue and purple, or eventually turn into a completely different species that climbs trees or something lol
 Originally Posted by tommo
No, of course not. But for the foreseeable future, it will be the same. So it is still incredibly useful for making decisions.
It's our best guess, the best we can possibly do, and that's incredibly important and awesome, but as far as how well it will work in the future I don't think we can say. The process will still go on and we will keep making our best guesses based on anything that comes our way, even if it is completely unexpected.
|
|
Bookmarks