But the only way to determine whether it is simply a theory to fit the facts or whether it is truly generalizable is to test it against unknown facts via prediction. The goal is not a description which is true or corresponds to the truth, or at least that is not the immediate goal. In it I tried to argue that there are some fundamental problems involved in conceptualizing time which, in my mind, appear intractable, and hence its existence as a concept contradictory, impossible.
Obviously, this is a handy thing to have a grasp on and this is why we care about special orthogonal matrices.
I think that that is neither true nor a good value.
The intuitive picture is that of a smooth surface.
On the one hand, he makes interesting and insightful observations on all sorts of phenomena; on the other, he never really synthesizes those observations into a single, coherent argument. Forgetting is necessary to free ourselves from imperfectly understood "lessons of history," so that we can see the challenges ahead clearly, without preconceptions or prejudice. I think that that is neither true nor a good value. I would have thought that evolutionary biology would have provided an adequate explanation of this, as well as the recurrence of what we call altruism.
Obviously, this is a handy thing to have a grasp on and this is why we care about special orthogonal matrices.
I think that that is neither true nor a good value. The goal is not a description which is true or corresponds to the truth, or at least that is not the immediate goal. This at least is the goal. That formulation is, as I believe I have said before, perfectly monstruous. The dilemma is that when individuals pursue personal gain, the net result for society as a whole may be impoverishment. In that case, of course, political theory is entirely superfluous, which is why this is all a waste of time.
If one does not wish to be this deterministic about it, perhaps one should allow more latitute to individuals to discover their own conception of happiness.
This at least is the goal.
If it were, we could have basically stopped after the Greeks figured out a fair amount of geometry.
In other words, a view of the universe from a materialist perspective at any given moment shows that everything in the univese is different in the sense of being distinct.
To some extent this seems to cut against the basic scientific impulse to simplify, to generalize, which is what a law or an equation generally does.
This at least is the goal. Obviously, this is a handy thing to have a grasp on and this is why we care about special orthogonal matrices. On the one hand, he makes interesting and insightful observations on all sorts of phenomena; on the other, he never really synthesizes those observations into a single, coherent argument. In other words, no matter what went wrong, the body of theories and assumptions that led to the hypothesis do not work as they now stand. Of course Einstein is justly famed for, among many other things, pioneering the idea of space-time.
When the facts or events are given, anyone can interpret them, and the fact that these events are known can mask the relative merits of the theory which interprets them. America at one end is now easily outweighed by any substantial grouping at the other, and most of those powers are on friendly terms with each other. That formulation is, as I believe I have said before, perfectly monstruous. Imagine taking a point on the sphere, and its antipodal point, and pulling them together to meet somewhere inside the sphere. In that case, of course, political theory is entirely superfluous, which is why this is all a waste of time. Every hypothesis, in essence, is a prediction about the future.
In other words, no matter what went wrong, the body of theories and assumptions that led to the hypothesis do not work as they now stand.
Do this with every single point on the sphere, each point and its antipodal point meeting each other but meeting no other points.