S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 1 历史唯物主义是伪科学，在中国是个禁忌话题，因为它彻底动摇共党的理论基础与存在
价值。 |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 2 Philosopher of science Karl Popper, in his Conjectures and Refutations,
critiqued such claims of the explanatory power or valid application of
historical materialism by arguing that it could explain or explain away any
fact brought before it, making it unfalsifiable.
历史唯物主义拒绝被科学方法检验真伪，所以它是伪科学。
历史唯物主义最大的价值，是支持共党理论与存在价值。
作为预测未来会发生什么事情，它没有价值。 |
b*****l
发帖数: 3821 | 3 这个帖子就是伪科学，因为没有任何论证，逻辑不通。
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: 历史唯物主义是伪科学，在中国是个禁忌话题，因为它彻底动摇共党的理论基础与存在
: 价值。
|
t******g
发帖数: 17520 | |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 5 Would it be possible to share Karl Popper's writings on that? Thanks SeeU in
advance.
any
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Philosopher of science Karl Popper, in his Conjectures and Refutations,
: critiqued such claims of the explanatory power or valid application of
: historical materialism by arguing that it could explain or explain away any
: fact brought before it, making it unfalsifiable.
: 历史唯物主义拒绝被科学方法检验真伪，所以它是伪科学。
: 历史唯物主义最大的价值，是支持共党理论与存在价值。
: 作为预测未来会发生什么事情，它没有价值。
|
b*****l
发帖数: 3821 | 6 你连哲学和科学的分别都没有弄清楚。
any
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Philosopher of science Karl Popper, in his Conjectures and Refutations,
: critiqued such claims of the explanatory power or valid application of
: historical materialism by arguing that it could explain or explain away any
: fact brought before it, making it unfalsifiable.
: 历史唯物主义拒绝被科学方法检验真伪，所以它是伪科学。
: 历史唯物主义最大的价值，是支持共党理论与存在价值。
: 作为预测未来会发生什么事情，它没有价值。
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 7 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poverty_of_Historicism#Fundamental_
problems_with_historicist_theory
in
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: Would it be possible to share Karl Popper's writings on that? Thanks SeeU in
: advance.
:
: any
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy concerned with the
foundations, methods, and implications of science. The central questions of
this study concern what qualifies as science, the reliability of scientific
theories, and the ultimate purpose of science.
Distinguishing between science and non-science is referred to as the
demarcation problem. Karl Popper called this the central question in the
philosophy of science. |
t******g
发帖数: 17520 | 9 唉， 当年在大学图书馆的旧书摊上花了一块钱还是5毛买了本泛黄的黑格尔的历史哲学
， 看了几十页以后， 和同寝室的同学说， 黑格尔的思想境界和我的很像啊， 寝室同
学在精神痛殴了兔子王以后，塞给他一本书叫文化苦旅。。。。
个人愚见， 在中国的国土上是开不出真正意义上哲学花朵的
霍金说的哲学已死， 其实哲学在中国死地更早 |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 10 读了，但没有具体'批判' “historical materialism”.也没有谈到“materialism”
。 倒是谈到了historicism 和 holism. 我说的对吗？
这个莲子是别人评价Poper的哲学思想的吧。
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poverty_of_Historicism#Fundamental_
: problems_with_historicist_theory
:
: in
|
|
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 11 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
6. Social and Political Thought—The Critique of Historicism and Holism ［最
后一段里］偶咋读着Popper描述向往的社会似乎贴近众生平等皆有佛性自度度人的大同
社会状态涅。也是佛说《吉祥经》（小部经集 II.4）里的“civilized land”［文明
国土， 也就是指承认修练心智之重要性的地方。］
“The open society as thus conceived of by Popper may be defined as ‘an
association of free individuals respecting each other's rights within the
framework of mutual protection supplied by the state, and achieving, through
the making of responsible, rational decisions, a growing measure of humane
and enlightened life’ (Levinson, R.B. In Defense of Plato, 17).”
---读《吉祥经》下面莲子［15 楼］－－
http://www.mitbbs.ca/article_t/Wisdom/31662425.html
“Living in a civilized land,
having made merit in the past,
directing oneself rightly:
This is the highest protection.
依往昔所修福德、
生活于文明国土、
志向端正:这是至高的吉祥。” |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 12 historicism 就是历史主义。Popper 批判（唯心或唯物的）历史主义的决定论，点名
对象包括马克
思的历史唯物主义（唯物），以及黑格尔的历史主义（唯心）。
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 读了，但没有具体'批判' “historical materialism”.也没有谈到“materialism”
: 。 倒是谈到了historicism 和 holism. 我说的对吗？
: 这个莲子是别人评价Poper的哲学思想的吧。
: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 13 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/sep/24/kar
Marxism, Popper claims, is analogous to the psychological theories of Adler
and pseudo-sciences such as astrology. His attack upon the ideology became
two-pronged: Marxism principally consisted of unfalsifiable claims, and it
was a historicism. It could not, therefore, be described as scientific.
What do we mean by "scientific", in this instance? Marx claimed that his
system of political thought was predictive and, to an extent, this was the
case. Yet Marxists did not follow the strict Popperian criterion of
falsification: when predictions were not in fact borne out (for example, the
failure of working class revolution to occur throughout European societies)
, the underlying theory was not rejected, but was salvaged by the use of ad
hoc hypotheses which were deployed to shore the theory up – a classic
symptom of a pseudo-science, according to Popper. |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 14 不是Popper写的。没有批"historical materialism",标题是政治学不是科学。全文如
下。要是读标题 “Karl Popper, the enemy of certainty”， 不知道Poper他如何看
待三乘之说呢？：）
［题目］Karl Popper, the enemy of certainty, part 3: rejecting politics as
science
［作者］Liz Williams
[来源］ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/sep/24/karl-popper-politics-as-science
Attempts to present political systems as scientific are increasingly
regarded as old-fashioned: the "common sense" view suggests that politics is
not scientific, cannot be reduced to a set of principles such that it can
be applied across cultures and societies. Yet to an extent, this "common
sense" view derives from the work of Karl Popper, from that early attempt by
the latter to tackle claims of Marxism's "scientific" basis. Popper's
harsher critics have claimed that it is only because his attention was
turned to Marxism that he himself attracted further notice at all, but I
would dispute this. I consider that Popper's critique of logical positivism
is a devastating one; he would have had a place in the philosophy of science
even without the critique of contemporary political philosophies.
That critique emerges out of Popper's rejection of verificationism and his
espousal of falsificationism. Perhaps ironically, Popper was himself a
teenage Marxist, attracted by the apparent explanatory power of the ideology
. Yet, with a remarkable degree of insight, fuelled by tragic personal
experience, he soon realised that this explanatory power was itself an
illusion – a weakness of the ideology, rather than a strength, and it was
this insight (derived ultimately from the much earlier work of Hume) that
provided the driving force behind his own critique of verificationism, both
within Marxism and beyond it. By the time he was 17, Popper said, he had
realised that:
"I had accepted a dangerous creed uncritically, dogmatically… Once I
had looked at it critically, the gaps and loopholes and inconsistencies in
the Marxist theory became obvious…"
Marxism, Popper claims, is analogous to the psychological theories of Adler
and pseudo-sciences such as astrology. His attack upon the ideology became
two-pronged: Marxism principally consisted of unfalsifiable claims, and it
was a historicism. It could not, therefore, be described as scientific.
"I found that those of my friends who were admirers of Marx, Freud, and
Adler, were impressed by a number of points common to these theories, and
especially by their apparent explanatory power. These theories appear to be
able to explain practically everything that happened within the fields to
which they referred... There was no conceivable human behavior which could
contradict them."
What do we mean by "scientific", in this instance? Marx claimed that his
system of political thought was predictive and, to an extent, this was the
case. Yet Marxists did not follow the strict Popperian criterion of
falsification: when predictions were not in fact borne out (for example, the
failure of working class revolution to occur throughout European societies)
, the underlying theory was not rejected, but was salvaged by the use of ad
hoc hypotheses which were deployed to shore the theory up – a classic
symptom of a pseudo-science, according to Popper. Initially an attempt at
scientific rigour, Marxism collapses back into the mire.
It's obviously possible to take issue with this on a number of counts:
Wollheim, Cornforth and Hudelson all did so, among others, concentrating
primarily on the accusations of historicism. One could also argue that
Popper's critique of Marxism applies principally to efforts to defend the
ideology on scientific grounds. There are plenty of Marxists out there who
take a different view of predictability and the capacity for explanation and
analysis. Popper's critique of verificationism is primarily to challenge
claims of scientific status; it does not necessarily state that the theory
should be thrown out entirely.
Other commentators (Verikukis, for instance) seek to challenge Popper on his
home turf, claiming that he exhibits a double standard – a higher bar for
Marxism, and a lower bar for his own attempts to devise a social science.
Verikukis argues that the charges of unfalsifiability against Marxism have
rarely been addressed, except in the wider arena of debunking the criterion
of falsifiability itself (get rid of that, and the anti-Marxist critique
collapses like a house of cards, requiring a complete refit elsewhere). This
is the approach taken by Kuhn, Feyerabend and Lakatos – none of them
Marxists – which we will consider on another occasion.
But it isn't just Marx who comes under fire in Popper's two-volume work, The
Open Society and Its Enemies. Modern totalitarians are compared with
ancient ones, namely, Plato: an early proponent, so Popper claims, of
utopian social engineering. Given the nature of the society in The Republic,
and its reliance upon a kind of early eugenics, I find it difficult to
disagree with much of Popper's analysis. The utopian engineer, according to
Popper, formulates laws about social development and prescribes action
accordingly: both Plato and Marx fall into this historicist guise. |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 15 Where did the sentences come from? :)
any
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Philosopher of science Karl Popper, in his Conjectures and Refutations,
: critiqued such claims of the explanatory power or valid application of
: historical materialism by arguing that it could explain or explain away any
: fact brought before it, making it unfalsifiable.
: 历史唯物主义拒绝被科学方法检验真伪，所以它是伪科学。
: 历史唯物主义最大的价值，是支持共党理论与存在价值。
: 作为预测未来会发生什么事情，它没有价值。
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 16 CONJECTURES AND REFUTATIONS
p. 36-38
http://xxsy.library.nenu.edu.cn/pluginfile.php/1066/mod_resourc
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: Where did the sentences come from? :)
:
: any
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 17 不。Historical Materialism， 重心是 ‘Materialism’。 Historical是定语。
“（唯心或唯物的）历史主义“ 不是 “历史唯物主义”。
如果找出Popper批评“Materialism”， 那就论据对论点了。
你删了帖子吧。或修改标题。 论据不支持论点。
－－－－
关于Historical Materialism, 看这里http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism 。）看下面转贴的一段
“While the "historical" part of historical materialism does not cause a
comprehension problem (i.e., it means the present is explained by analysing
the past), the term materialism is more difficult. Historical materialism
uses "materialism" to make two separate points, where the truth or falsehood
of one point does not affect the others.”
－－
Popper 有批评Materialism (唯物主义吗？) ：）
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: historicism 就是历史主义。Popper 批判（唯心或唯物的）历史主义的决定论，点名
: 对象包括马克
: 思的历史唯物主义（唯物），以及黑格尔的历史主义（唯心）。
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 18 Popper批评历史主义，Marx的历史唯物主义也被他点名批评。上帖给了Popper批评Marx
的历史主义出处。
唯物主义Popper有没有批不知道。
analysing
falsehood
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 不。Historical Materialism， 重心是 ‘Materialism’。 Historical是定语。
: “（唯心或唯物的）历史主义“ 不是 “历史唯物主义”。
: 如果找出Popper批评“Materialism”， 那就论据对论点了。
: 你删了帖子吧。或修改标题。 论据不支持论点。
: －－－－
: 关于Historical Materialism, 看这里http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism 。）看下面转贴的一段
: “While the "historical" part of historical materialism does not cause a
: comprehension problem (i.e., it means the present is explained by analysing
: the past), the term materialism is more difficult. Historical materialism
: uses "materialism" to make two separate points, where the truth or falsehood
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 19 SeeU师兄。我查了，还是没有批“historical Materialism”. p36-38没有。'
materialism'出现在277页以后。
CONJECTURES AND REFUTATIONS
p. 36-38
http://xxsy.library.nenu.edu.cn/pluginfile.php/1066/mod_resourc |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 20 SeeU师兄。我查了，还是没有批“historical Materialism”. p36-38没有。'
materialism'出现在277页以后。
Popper批评了"historicism", 在哪里点名批评了“historical Materialism”。 不同
的概念哪。 ：）
Marx
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Popper批评历史主义，Marx的历史唯物主义也被他点名批评。上帖给了Popper批评Marx
: 的历史主义出处。
: 唯物主义Popper有没有批不知道。
:
: analysing
: falsehood
|
|
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 21 而且“historicism”出现在一下页码。不是p。36-38.
“historicism, 63, 216 & n, 222 n, 260 n, 332 f, 336 ff;”
-----------------------------------------
http://xxsy.library.nenu.edu.cn/pluginfile.php/1066/mod_resourc ［p.408］
怎么这么多漏洞涅。：）
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: CONJECTURES AND REFUTATIONS
: p. 36-38
: http://xxsy.library.nenu.edu.cn/pluginfile.php/1066/mod_resourc
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 22 文章中的Marx's historicism就是历史唯物主义。难道马克思还主张过别的历史主义？
其实Google一下，Popper批马克思的历史主义不难找到来源。e.g.
https://books.google.com/books?id=gb4RAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA87
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: SeeU师兄。我查了，还是没有批“historical Materialism”. p36-38没有。'
: materialism'出现在277页以后。
: Popper批评了"historicism", 在哪里点名批评了“historical Materialism”。 不同
: 的概念哪。 ：）
:
: Marx
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 24 历史主义是Marx主张的吗？ ：）
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicism
Karl Popper used the term historicism in his influential books The Poverty
of Historicism and The Open Society and Its Enemies, to mean: "an approach
to the social sciences which assumes that historical prediction is their
primary aim, and which assumes that this aim is attainable by discovering
the 'rhythms' or the 'patterns', the 'laws' or the 'trends' that underlie
the evolution of history".[5] Karl Popper wrote with reference to Hegel's
theory of history, which he criticized extensively. However, there is wide
dispute whether Popper's description of "historicism" is an accurate
description of Hegel, or more a reflection of his own philosophical
antagonists, including Marxist-Leninist thought, then widely held as posing
a challenge to the philosophical basis of the West, as well as theories such
as Spengler's which drew predictions about the future course of events from
the past.
In The Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper attacks "historicism" and its
proponents, among whom (as well as Hegel) he identifies and singles out
Plato and Marx — calling them all "enemies of the open society". The
objection he makes is that historicist positions, by claiming that there is
an inevitable and deterministic pattern to history, abrogate the democratic
responsibility of each one of us to make our own free contributions to the
evolution of society, and hence lead to totalitarianism.
Another of his targets is what he calls "moral historicism", the attempt to
infer moral values from the course of history. This may take the form of
conservatism (former might is right), positivism (might is right) or
futurism (coming might is right). Futurism must be distinguished from
prophecies that the right will prevail: these attempt to infer history from
ethics, rather than ethics from history, and are therefore historicism in
the normal sense rather than moral historicism.
He also attacks what he calls "Historism", which he regards as distinct from
historicism. By historism, he means the tendency to regard every argument
or idea as completely accounted for by its historical context, as opposed to
assessing it by its merits. In Popperian terms, the "New Historicism" is an
example of historism rather than of historicism proper.
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: 文章中的Marx's historicism就是历史唯物主义。难道马克思还主张过别的历史主义？
: 其实Google一下，Popper批马克思的历史主义不难找到来源。e.g.
: https://books.google.com/books?id=gb4RAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA87
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 25 理论上有可能证伪。如果你能找出一个理论，说服大部分专家或证明它是真的，但这个
理论不能被证伪，则Popper的主张就被证伪了。
实际上似乎还没有。
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 那么，popper的证伪理论能不能被证伪呢
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 26 不。Historical Materialism， 重心是 ‘Materialism’。 Historical是定语。
“（唯心或唯物的）历史主义“ 不是 “历史唯物主义”。
如果找出Popper批评“Materialism”， 那就论据对论点了。
你删了帖子吧。或修改标题。 论据不支持论点。
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: 文章中的Marx's historicism就是历史唯物主义。难道马克思还主张过别的历史主义？
: 其实Google一下，Popper批马克思的历史主义不难找到来源。e.g.
: https://books.google.com/books?id=gb4RAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA87
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 27 这不是Popper的理论的问题。是大家如何用Popper的文献支持个人论点。
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: 理论上有可能证伪。如果你能找出一个理论，说服大部分专家或证明它是真的，但这个
: 理论不能被证伪，则Popper的主张就被证伪了。
: 实际上似乎还没有。
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 28 没有能说服大部分专家或者被能被证明它是真的理论？
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: 理论上有可能证伪。如果你能找出一个理论，说服大部分专家或证明它是真的，但这个
: 理论不能被证伪，则Popper的主张就被证伪了。
: 实际上似乎还没有。
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 30 That's your view.
The Historicism part of Historical Materialism means history develops
towards a unavoidable destiny(from ..., which you learned in school, towards
communism). Popper refutes the method that concludes history has a destiny
according to trends, scientific laws, etc. This completely blows up the
theoretical foundation of Marxism. For a CCP attack on 波普尔, see
http://theory.gmw.cn/2013-08/20/content_8651246.htm
以创立批判理性主义与反历史决定论闻名的英籍哲学家波普尔，以强调历史无规律性、
历史无重演性、历史的不可预测、历史不可检验、历史没有意义的基本观点以及反整体
主义、反本质主义、反乌托邦主义的方法论来批判历史决定论尤其是唯物史观，对马克
思主义构成了最为严重的挑战与威胁。
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 不。Historical Materialism， 重心是 ‘Materialism’。 Historical是定语。
: “（唯心或唯物的）历史主义“ 不是 “历史唯物主义”。
: 如果找出Popper批评“Materialism”， 那就论据对论点了。
: 你删了帖子吧。或修改标题。 论据不支持论点。
|
|
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 31 Let me rephrase:
A 说服大部分专家它是真的，或
B 证明它是真的，
but这个理论不能被证伪
then Popper is wrong.
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 没有能说服大部分专家或者被能被证明它是真的理论？
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 32 那么，哪些理论属于能说服大部分专家它是真的，或者证明它是真的？
然后这些理论里面，哪些又是能证伪的呢？
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Let me rephrase:
: A 说服大部分专家它是真的，或
: B 证明它是真的，
: but这个理论不能被证伪
: then Popper is wrong.
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 33 Popper uses Einstein's General Relativity as an example, which predicts that
light will bend its path near a gravitational field, since that's the
shortest path in a curved space-time which light will follow. The theory can
be
falsified by observing whether this actually occurs. If light doesn't bend
when
passing by gravitational fields (e.g. of a star), then General Relativity is
wrong. I'll not try to explain relativity in detail here.
General Relativity is taken by most physicists as correct AFAIK.
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 那么，哪些理论属于能说服大部分专家它是真的，或者证明它是真的？
: 然后这些理论里面，哪些又是能证伪的呢？
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 34 "Historicism part of Historical Materialism"??
YOUR ENGLISH IS 'REALLY' GOOD!
能说“The 小乘 part of 大乘 ” 吗？ 或者 “The 大乘 part of 小乘 ” 吗？：）
towards
destiny
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: That's your view.
: The Historicism part of Historical Materialism means history develops
: towards a unavoidable destiny(from ..., which you learned in school, towards
: communism). Popper refutes the method that concludes history has a destiny
: according to trends, scientific laws, etc. This completely blows up the
: theoretical foundation of Marxism. For a CCP attack on 波普尔, see
: http://theory.gmw.cn/2013-08/20/content_8651246.htm
: 以创立批判理性主义与反历史决定论闻名的英籍哲学家波普尔，以强调历史无规律性、
: 历史无重演性、历史的不可预测、历史不可检验、历史没有意义的基本观点以及反整体
: 主义、反本质主义、反乌托邦主义的方法论来批判历史决定论尤其是唯物史观，对马克
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 35 那佛教理论算伪科学吗？
that
can
is
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Popper uses Einstein's General Relativity as an example, which predicts that
: light will bend its path near a gravitational field, since that's the
: shortest path in a curved space-time which light will follow. The theory can
: be
: falsified by observing whether this actually occurs. If light doesn't bend
: when
: passing by gravitational fields (e.g. of a star), then General Relativity is
: wrong. I'll not try to explain relativity in detail here.
: General Relativity is taken by most physicists as correct AFAIK.
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 36 This is too generic to have a meaningful discussion IMO.
Take a more specific claim as an example. Buddhism claims that mind doesn't
disappear when you die, and it can migrate from life to life carrying over
karma, etc. Mind is theoretically observable, e.g. 他心通，or some
scientific instrument that has yet to be invented. So it's possible to
observe whether mind migrate from life to life at the time of death.
Since science doesn't know what mind is right now, we are far from carrying
out anything like that using scientific instruments.
On the other hand, if many people with 他心通 independently observe a
reincarnation event(i.e. predict a connection exist between seemingly
unrelated people), and the newborn later can recollect his/her previous life
with good accuracy, would that be convincing enough? How about if this
occurs many times in controlled environment (to exclude fraud, chance, etc.)
? This would at least challenge people to come up with other theories if
they refuse to accept reincarnation as explanation.
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 那佛教理论算伪科学吗？
:
: that
: can
: is
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 37 好例子。
那， Popper或他的学说有没有证伪广义相对论涅？
如果有，那是不是对科学造成“最为严重的挑战与威胁”，就像您说的Popper撼动“历
史主义 part of 历史唯物主义”那样？
证伪广义相对论后的科学大厦将倾吗？倒了？ 历史唯物主义涅？ ：）
和佛比较，科学‘真’吗？和科学比，佛‘伪’吗？
that
can
is
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: Popper uses Einstein's General Relativity as an example, which predicts that
: light will bend its path near a gravitational field, since that's the
: shortest path in a curved space-time which light will follow. The theory can
: be
: falsified by observing whether this actually occurs. If light doesn't bend
: when
: passing by gravitational fields (e.g. of a star), then General Relativity is
: wrong. I'll not try to explain relativity in detail here.
: General Relativity is taken by most physicists as correct AFAIK.
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 38 那这个“他心通”的例子属于尚无法被（科学仪器）检验，因而既无法谈证明也无法证
伪的情况。
t
carrying
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: This is too generic to have a meaningful discussion IMO.
: Take a more specific claim as an example. Buddhism claims that mind doesn't
: disappear when you die, and it can migrate from life to life carrying over
: karma, etc. Mind is theoretically observable, e.g. 他心通，or some
: scientific instrument that has yet to be invented. So it's possible to
: observe whether mind migrate from life to life at the time of death.
: Since science doesn't know what mind is right now, we are far from carrying
: out anything like that using scientific instruments.
: On the other hand, if many people with 他心通 independently observe a
: reincarnation event(i.e. predict a connection exist between seemingly
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 39 有点所答非所问。
你是在回答如何应用Popper的理论，收集证据证伪佛教的有些理论吗？能点别画圈。：
）
问题是问“佛教理论是算伪科学吗？”
t
carrying
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: This is too generic to have a meaningful discussion IMO.
: Take a more specific claim as an example. Buddhism claims that mind doesn't
: disappear when you die, and it can migrate from life to life carrying over
: karma, etc. Mind is theoretically observable, e.g. 他心通，or some
: scientific instrument that has yet to be invented. So it's possible to
: observe whether mind migrate from life to life at the time of death.
: Since science doesn't know what mind is right now, we are far from carrying
: out anything like that using scientific instruments.
: On the other hand, if many people with 他心通 independently observe a
: reincarnation event(i.e. predict a connection exist between seemingly
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 40 在一篇作于1952年但从未发表的短文《神存在吗？》里，罗素写到：
“如果我说地球和火星之间有个瓷制茶壶以椭圆形轨道绕太阳公转，我小心地补充说明
这茶壶实在太小，即使用我们最强大的望远镜也找不到它，那没人可以否定我的主张。
但如果我要这样声明，则既然我的声明无法被推翻，那这在人类理智下是不可容忍、要
受怀疑的假设，我应该适当地被当作在胡言乱语。但假设这茶壶的存在在古书里被确认
了，并在每个星期日以神圣真理的形式被教导，而且灌输给每个学校的孩童，那对于相
信茶壶存在的迟疑会被当作反常的特征，怀疑者在启蒙的年代会被会受精神医师注意，
在更早的时代中则被异端的审判者注意。”
这个“他心通”，是不是就跟罗素的这个茶壶一样？ |
|
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 41 现在有两个袋子：
1） Popper 给咱们一个袋子，叫科学，里头全是已经被证伪的和将被证伪的理论；
2） 佛给咱们一个袋子，里头都是目前没被证伪的和将来永远不能／不必证伪的佛法。
你中意那个？ Popper的袋子有多“真”， 有多“不伪”？
Popper的那个袋子有多大？ 再大，它外面还有东西，他那个袋子里都是‘伪’的，那
他袋子外面是什么？
修佛的，为什么要拿Popper的袋子装饰在身上涅？ ：）
要拿Popper的‘科学哲学理论’去评价其他的‘哲学理论’，可以吗？ 或者把“科学
哲学理论”用到它不能胜任的地方，例如不能证伪或没有必要证伪的地方呢？
难道是要把佛法的袋子装到Popper的袋子里吗？ ：） |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 42 The point is a theory should risk being refuted with predictions. If the
predictions turn out to be true later, the theory may be valid. If not, the
theory is wrong. Coming up with ad hoc modifications after predictions
failed, as Historical materialism did, is not scientific. It has taken out
the risk of being proved wrong, therefore a form of intellectual cheating.
General relativity passed the falsification test with flying colors. The
astronomical observation matched what relativity predicted accurately which
otherwise can't be explained. Had it failed, it would be in trouble.
That is Popper's argument.
I don't think you read what I quoted, or you read it but didn't get the
point. Otherwise you would ask based on what you read.
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 好例子。
: 那， Popper或他的学说有没有证伪广义相对论涅？
: 如果有，那是不是对科学造成“最为严重的挑战与威胁”，就像您说的Popper撼动“历
: 史主义 part of 历史唯物主义”那样？
: 证伪广义相对论后的科学大厦将倾吗？倒了？ 历史唯物主义涅？ ：）
: 和佛比较，科学‘真’吗？和科学比，佛‘伪’吗？
:
: that
: can
: is
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 43 这不是Popper的理论的问题。是大家如何用Popper的文献支持个人论点。
发信人: SeeU (See you), 信区: Wisdom
标 题: Re: 历史唯物主义为什么是伪科学？
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Mar 31 10:16:12 2015, 美东)
The point is a theory should risk being refuted with predictions. If the
predictions turn out to be true later, the theory may be valid. If not, the
theory is wrong. Coming up with ad hoc modifications after predictions
failed, as Historical materialism did, is not scientific. It has taken out
the risk of being proved wrong, therefore a form of intellectual cheating.
General relativity passed the falsification test with flying colors. The
astronomical observation matched what relativity predicted accurately which
otherwise can't be explained. Had it failed, it would be in trouble.
That is Popper's argument.
I don't think you read what I quoted, or you read it but didn't get the
point. Otherwise you would ask based on what you read. |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 44 尚待时日会得。现在的SeeU师兄不是SeeI师兄 ：）
【在 b*****l 的大作中提到】
: 这个帖子就是伪科学，因为没有任何论证，逻辑不通。
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 45 可能哲科不分，抑或项庄舞剑？
【在 b*****l 的大作中提到】
: 你连哲学和科学的分别都没有弄清楚。
:
: any
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 46 I don't think so.
If someone claims he can read your mind, test it. How?
You think of something, write it down, then another, write it down. Repeat
as necessary.
He follows your mind, and write down what you think of.
Compare notes afterwards to see if they match.
Test as many people as you want.
Similar (but not quite there) tests has been described in Journey to the
West.
In the novel, both sides knew what was hidden in the closet 3 times. The
monkey king won by replacing the object after the king hid it.
You can argue that they know by clairvoyance or by knowing the mind.
If you don't write it down, then clairvoyance can be excluded, e.g. Record
you thought by voice.
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 在一篇作于1952年但从未发表的短文《神存在吗？》里，罗素写到：
: “如果我说地球和火星之间有个瓷制茶壶以椭圆形轨道绕太阳公转，我小心地补充说明
: 这茶壶实在太小，即使用我们最强大的望远镜也找不到它，那没人可以否定我的主张。
: 但如果我要这样声明，则既然我的声明无法被推翻，那这在人类理智下是不可容忍、要
: 受怀疑的假设，我应该适当地被当作在胡言乱语。但假设这茶壶的存在在古书里被确认
: 了，并在每个星期日以神圣真理的形式被教导，而且灌输给每个学校的孩童，那对于相
: 信茶壶存在的迟疑会被当作反常的特征，怀疑者在启蒙的年代会被会受精神医师注意，
: 在更早的时代中则被异端的审判者注意。”
: 这个“他心通”，是不是就跟罗素的这个茶壶一样？
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 47 师兄，请象贴佛经一样，直接把Popper写的贴过来吧。昨天你的文献我都查了。不象您
自己写的或说的。
哲科不分，自己信仰的东西也被否定了。显般若？不。有智慧，是。 雪庐老人说，智
慧亦正亦斜。慎慎。：）
the
which
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: The point is a theory should risk being refuted with predictions. If the
: predictions turn out to be true later, the theory may be valid. If not, the
: theory is wrong. Coming up with ad hoc modifications after predictions
: failed, as Historical materialism did, is not scientific. It has taken out
: the risk of being proved wrong, therefore a form of intellectual cheating.
: General relativity passed the falsification test with flying colors. The
: astronomical observation matched what relativity predicted accurately which
: otherwise can't be explained. Had it failed, it would be in trouble.
: That is Popper's argument.
: I don't think you read what I quoted, or you read it but didn't get the
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 48 SeeU师兄，别个师兄说什么，包括我建议您删贴或改标题，您说的回答都或相似的“I
don't think so”。您用"我"了。
那您是说标题也是"I think so" ?! :) 是，SeeU thinks so!
那，是不是，帖子标题也是 U think so （您自己认为）; Popper可能并不那样认为？
从您贴上来的popper的和相关文献，其他师兄包括我确实 See U think so! （看出来
您自己认为！） :)
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: I don't think so.
: If someone claims he can read your mind, test it. How?
: You think of something, write it down, then another, write it down. Repeat
: as necessary.
: He follows your mind, and write down what you think of.
: Compare notes afterwards to see if they match.
: Test as many people as you want.
: Similar (but not quite there) tests has been described in Journey to the
: West.
: In the novel, both sides knew what was hidden in the closet 3 times. The
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 49 SeeU师兄开始是SeeI师兄了。 恭贺！ ：） |
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 50 Popper的理论，历史唯物主义，佛的三乘说，大小乘都不是咱们得问题。
修佛的如何拿如何放下，用拿来的做什么，从中得了什么？
修佛我愿修般若！非辩智牙慧。：）
－－－－－－－－－－
佛.镜
自说得不算，
般若惠光现！
镜花水月处，
谦光也自敛?
哈哈。:)
－－－
南无观世音菩萨！
南无阿弥陀佛！
the
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 这不是Popper的理论的问题。是大家如何用Popper的文献支持个人论点。
: 发信人: SeeU (See you), 信区: Wisdom
: 标 题: Re: 历史唯物主义为什么是伪科学？
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Mar 31 10:16:12 2015, 美东)
: The point is a theory should risk being refuted with predictions. If the
: predictions turn out to be true later, the theory may be valid. If not, the
: theory is wrong. Coming up with ad hoc modifications after predictions
: failed, as Historical materialism did, is not scientific. It has taken out
: the risk of being proved wrong, therefore a form of intellectual cheating.
: General relativity passed the falsification test with flying colors. The
|
|
|
b*****l
发帖数: 3821 | 51 这位S大师文不对题已经是有历史的了。
the
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 这不是Popper的理论的问题。是大家如何用Popper的文献支持个人论点。
: 发信人: SeeU (See you), 信区: Wisdom
: 标 题: Re: 历史唯物主义为什么是伪科学？
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Mar 31 10:16:12 2015, 美东)
: The point is a theory should risk being refuted with predictions. If the
: predictions turn out to be true later, the theory may be valid. If not, the
: theory is wrong. Coming up with ad hoc modifications after predictions
: failed, as Historical materialism did, is not scientific. It has taken out
: the risk of being proved wrong, therefore a form of intellectual cheating.
: General relativity passed the falsification test with flying colors. The
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 52 大师？师兄指Popper吗？
对了， 我有个事要问您。
历史唯物主义，是用唯物的哲学观点看待和研究‘历史’吗？属“历史哲学”？；类似
于Popper把“科学”作为他的哲学研究的对象，称“科学哲学”？
恭谢先。
也感谢SeeU师兄，昨天到现在颇读些Popper的和相关东西。为学日益了。：）
【在 b*****l 的大作中提到】
: 这位S大师文不对题已经是有历史的了。
:
: the
|
b*****l
发帖数: 3821 | 53 大师指三代S大师。
至少历史唯物主义自身认为它是“历史哲学”
“历史唯物主义（Historical Materialism）是马克思主义哲学的重要组成部分，也被
称为“唯物主义历史理论”或“唯物史观”。
...因其主要关注的是对历史规律的阐明，因而历史唯物主义可以归入历史哲学，具体
地说是一种思辨的历史哲学。
"
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 大师？师兄指Popper吗？
: 对了， 我有个事要问您。
: 历史唯物主义，是用唯物的哲学观点看待和研究‘历史’吗？属“历史哲学”？；类似
: 于Popper把“科学”作为他的哲学研究的对象，称“科学哲学”？
: 恭谢先。
: 也感谢SeeU师兄，昨天到现在颇读些Popper的和相关东西。为学日益了。：）
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 54 读其他哲学家对Popper评价说Popper也是马克思主义或其信仰者。看他的科学哲学的”
可证伪观’ 像似于‘否定，否定之否定“。 ：）
【在 b*****l 的大作中提到】
: 大师指三代S大师。
: 至少历史唯物主义自身认为它是“历史哲学”
: “历史唯物主义（Historical Materialism）是马克思主义哲学的重要组成部分，也被
: 称为“唯物主义历史理论”或“唯物史观”。
: ...因其主要关注的是对历史规律的阐明，因而历史唯物主义可以归入历史哲学，具体
: 地说是一种思辨的历史哲学。
: "
|
W**N
发帖数: 1037 | 55 索达吉堪布
一个人不管犯了什么错，都要学会宽恕他。你可以这样想：＂假如我置身于跟他一
样的处境，承受一样的因缘，难保不做出同样的事情。虽然这并不绝对，但有这种可能
。”所以，像宽恕自己一样去宽恕别人吧。
http://bbs.tianya.cn/post-16-650792-262.shtml |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 56 Unfortunately mitbbs blocks me to copy & paste the whole thing, so I just
copied some of them.
Popper
CONJECTURES AND REFUTATIONS
It was during the summer of 1919 that I began to feel more and more
dissatisfied with these three theories--the Marxist theory of history,
psychoanalysis, and individual psychology; and I began to feel dubious about
their claims to
scientific status. My problem perhaps first took the simple form, 'What is
wrong with Marxism, psycho-analysis, and individual psychology? Why are they
so different from physical theories, from Newton's theory, and especially
from
the theory of relativity?'
To make this contrast clear I should explain that few of us at the time
would have said that we believed in the truth of Einstein's theory of
gravitation. This shows that it was not my doubting the truth of those other
three theories which bothered me, but something else. Yet neither was it
that I merely felt mathematical physics to be more exact than the
sociological or psychological type of theory. Thus what worried me was
neither the problem of truth, at that stage
at least, nor the problem of exactness or measurability. It was rather that
I felt that these other three theories, though posing as sciences, had in
fact more in common with primitive myths than with science; that they
resembled astrology rather than astronomy. |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 57 These considerations led me in the winter of 1919-20 to conclusions which I
may now reformulate as follows.
1. It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every
theory--if we look for confirmations.
2. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky
predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question, we
should have expected an event which was incompatible with the theory--an
event which would have refuted the theory.
3. Every 'good' scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain
things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
4. A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is nonscientific
. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a
vice.
5. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute
it. Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability:
some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others;
they take, as it were, greater risks.
6. Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a
genuine test of the theory;and this means that it can be presented as a
serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now
speak in such cases of 'corroborating evidence'.)
7.Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld
by their admirers--for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary
assumption, or by re-interpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it
escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the
theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering
, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a'
conventionalist twist' or a '
conventionalist stratagem'.)
One can sum up all this by saying that the criterion of the scientific
status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability. |
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 58 I've already stated my case and cited evidence and I'll rest. In short,
Popper and I agree on historical materialism is not falsifiable, therefore
not scientific.
If you think I interpreted Popper wrong, you are free to refute it with
evidence(e.g. what Popper actually means).
If you think the logic is flawed, again you are welcome to point out the
logical flaw.
If you are simply not convinced, that's your freedom, and I respect that.
However, if you disagree and believe you are right, the burden of proof is
on you to falsify it. Have you?
IMO, you have simply expressed a POV w/o evidence. Pardon me if you did.
I
？
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: SeeU师兄，别个师兄说什么，包括我建议您删贴或改标题，您说的回答都或相似的“I
: don't think so”。您用"我"了。
: 那您是说标题也是"I think so" ?! :) 是，SeeU thinks so!
: 那，是不是，帖子标题也是 U think so （您自己认为）; Popper可能并不那样认为？
: 从您贴上来的popper的和相关文献，其他师兄包括我确实 See U think so! （看出来
: 您自己认为！） :)
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 59 分别什么是科学什么是伪科学的标准，就进入了哲学的范畴。我引维基百科就是说明这
一点。
谈科学哲学的可能是科学家，可能是哲学家。所以有时候科学家也驳斥伪科学。此时科
学家work outside the paradigm of science, and points out why the pseudo-
science doesn't fit into scientific paradigm(here paradigm is in the sense
of Thomas Kuhn).
【在 W**N 的大作中提到】
: 可能哲科不分，抑或项庄舞剑？
|
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 60 好吧，那实际历史中有做过你说的这种对他心通的test的例子吗？最后结果如何。
当然我知道一般把这种test归做特异功能系列。
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: I don't think so.
: If someone claims he can read your mind, test it. How?
: You think of something, write it down, then another, write it down. Repeat
: as necessary.
: He follows your mind, and write down what you think of.
: Compare notes afterwards to see if they match.
: Test as many people as you want.
: Similar (but not quite there) tests has been described in Journey to the
: West.
: In the novel, both sides knew what was hidden in the closet 3 times. The
|
|
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 61 No.
Some of the claims that have been tested include:
* Tummo
Meditation changes body temperatures: http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html
This is interesting because it's an example of mind influences matter. It is
difficult to explain from pure materialist POV.
* Different states of meditation exist and can be measured
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140515095545.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935386/
I'm no expert on the state of the art in this area. My general impression is
that various experiments have been conducted to measure what are the signs
of different states of meditation. It hasn't gone to the stage to know which
sign(s) distinguish one meditation state from the other; e.g. 1st dhyana
from 2nd dhyana, but it shows meditation states are different from 'normal'
states in a measurable way.
* Mindfulness-based stress reduction has been tested for its effectiveness
and is an active area of research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness-based_stress_reduction
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 好吧，那实际历史中有做过你说的这种对他心通的test的例子吗？最后结果如何。
: 当然我知道一般把这种test归做特异功能系列。
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 62 Marxist interpretation of history suffer from confirmation bias.
Confirmation bias, also called myside bias, is the tendency to search for,
interpret, or recall information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or
hypotheses.[Note 1][1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error
of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or
remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way.
The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply
entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as
supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory
have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement
becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the
same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence
for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater
reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory
correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events
or situations).
Marxist prediction for the following was wrong:
Communist revolution will occur in capitalist countries.
Communist revolution will produce a paradise.
On the contrary, communist countries abandon communism. This was not
predicted in historical materialism. |
a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | 63 那按popper的主张，他心通这个claim，算是什么类型的理论？科学？伪科学？
is
is
【在 S**U 的大作中提到】
: No.
: Some of the claims that have been tested include:
: * Tummo
: Meditation changes body temperatures: http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html
: This is interesting because it's an example of mind influences matter. It is
: difficult to explain from pure materialist POV.
: * Different states of meditation exist and can be measured
: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140515095545.htm
: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935386/
: I'm no expert on the state of the art in this area. My general impression is
|
S**U
发帖数: 7025 | 64 他心通 is not a 理论. Buddhist doesn't say much about how it works. It's
claim is that it exists.
Whether someone has 他心通 can be tested, so it's falsifiable and a
scientific claim. If someone passes the test, you can claim 他心通 is
possible.
I'd put in the same category that someone can run 100m in 9.6 seconds. It is
difficult to find someone who can do that, so a limited number of tests can
't be conclusive whether it's possible. But if someone claim that he can do
it, that can be tested/falsified.
【在 a*****y 的大作中提到】
: 那按popper的主张，他心通这个claim，算是什么类型的理论？科学？伪科学？
:
: is
: is
|
