Re: List User-related request

[John Conway <john.a.conway@gmail.com>]

Roberto Takata wrote:

> There is some misunderstanding here. 

Yes, we're talking past each other -- but I think we're actually in 
agreement.

> [... snip ...]

Agreed anyway...

> Falsificationism without verisimilitude could not allow us to think
> that we progressively (and asymptotically) approach to THE truth as we
> refine our scientific work.

True enough :-) -- but here's the line I was reacting to:

"I thought science was about falsifiable hypothesis and religion was 
about truth"

Now if we take "falsifiable hypotheses" to mean falsificationism (maybe 
an unjustified leap), then the sentence implies that you can simply 
chuck out the notion of truth and replace it with falsificationism. 
Which I think we'd both agree is problematic.

--

John Conway - palaeontographer
http://jconway.co.uk