|
|
|
Isaiah
Skeptic Friend
USA
83 Posts |
 Posted - 01/30/2005 : 14:32:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
In fact, with such a statement, the only way for our testing to change the actual truth value of the statement is for us to so drastically change either Wiki or Britannica that the statement would no longer refer to the same thing (for example, we could hack Wiki and completely change its functionality, and thus its independence). But if we accept that as "changing" the truth value of the original statement, then the statement wasn't well-defined (because by "Wikipedia" means something specific, and not a hack job version of it which doesn't act the same).
The part I bolded is what I'm most interested in. I'm not yet coming up with a statement which forces this, but it is this changing of the thing being studied which fascinates me. You aren't going to change Britannica by conducting any test on it, but with Wikipedia there could be a change that occurs which makes it not-Wikipedia--because of the nature of the test. I believe there are statements one could make about Wikipedia (thank goodness we're away from electrons and Heisenberg) which could not be tested in a manner which would satisfy a skeptic because the very nature of the test would change Wikipedia to something which is no longer the same thing. I'll think on it and try to come up with a well-defined statement. (The statement I used before was a direct quote from Wikipedia itself.)
I appreciate the patience. |
For Real Things I Know - http://solomonj.blogspot.com
"My point is, that you cannot use lack of evidence for one possibility as proof for another." - Dude
“I would rather delude myself with comforting fantasies than face a cold reality” - Isaiah, altered from astropin |
| Edited by - Isaiah on 01/30/2005 14:32:53 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2005 : 19:59:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Isaiah
I believe there are statements one could make about Wikipedia (thank goodness we're away from electrons and Heisenberg) which could not be tested in a manner which would satisfy a skeptic because the very nature of the test would change Wikipedia to something which is no longer the same thing.
Well, such tests shouldn't satisfy anyone, since if you change thing X into something not-X, it should be obvious that the original statement about X no longer applies. Someone who proposes a test of "This milk smells absolutely foul" which involves putting a glass of fresh, cold milk in a closet for a month simply doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.quote:
I'll think on it and try to come up with a well-defined statement.
Please do. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
