Matt Nolan

Discussion Tuesday

/1 Comment/in /by

Given I’m currently heavily heavily busy I’ll have to pull another comment from this Top 10 at 10

Economists don’t have universal truths, which is why I can’t understand how it is called a science.  Without those universal truths all you can expect is opinions.

Questions:

  1. Does science have universal truths?
  2. Is it true that without universal truths all we have are opinions?
  3. If 2 is true, then is it a lost cause – or perhaps is there a mechanism that makes some “opinions” relatively more valid/persuasive/closer to “truth”

Note:  I hope one of the other bloggers will cover off the National and Labour policy announcements – as I haven’t had any time to look at them at all – *wink wink*.  If it doesn’t happen during the week, I’ll see if I can manage something in the future.

1 reply
  1. Daniel J. Taylor
    Daniel J. Taylor says:

    1.) No, seeing as scientific method readily accepts the possibility of fallibilism, the seeking of truths that are “universal” is a moot pursuit. Indeed, science does not pretend to seek universal truths. Science seeks to predict the nature of phenomena through empirical and testible explanations – which is somewhat different.
    2.) It’s all just “opinions”, however some opinions have substantially more empirical backing than others.
    3.) As per 2.

Comments are closed.