On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Michael McMaster wrote:
> The validation of a theory can *only* be evaluated separately from
> the process that produces it - in my operational definition. The
> validation of a theory is pragmatic.
Current scientific testing tries to remove the person from the process. I
don't think that's possible. Validation will depend on the people using
the theory. This leads to limitations in the theory's use.
> Does it produce better results
> than its alternatives?
I'm not sure if this is the crux of the matter.
> to as his physics and of the physics of others "It is a likely
I think this is part of the crux of the matter. A story is likely if it
builds on a groups previous assumptions about their environment. A theory
is not an island onto itself. It is a small part of an intricate web.
Whether or not a theory is validated or not depends on if it is supported
by the groups previous assumptions or "consensual hallucination."
In a nutshell, I think the differences in uses of theories by different
groups drives the synthesis of new theories. Unfortunately, if all the
groups have the same use for a theory, then synthesis stagnates.
-- Andrew Andrew Moreno <firstname.lastname@example.org>