Monthly Archives: April 2014

Reductionism vs Antireductionism in Biology

This is a summary of some parts of Alex Rosenberg’s and Daniel McShea’s “Philosophy of Biology.” The reductionist holds that biological theories, generalizations, and explanations can be reduced to physics.  It is not that biological theories, laws, and explanations are … Continue reading

Posted in Philosophy of Biology | Leave a comment

Are Fairy Rings an example of Specified Complexity?

Here’s an excerpt from William Dembski’s Design Inference: … suppose I walk down a dirt road and find some stones lying about. The configuration of stones says nothing to me. Given my background knowledge I can discover no pattern in this configuration that … Continue reading

Posted in Intelligent Design | Leave a comment

Vulnerability in Scientific Theories without Popperian falsification

Popper held that falsifiability is what demarcates science from pseudoscience.  Pseudoscientific theories are compatible with all possible observation.  By contrast, scientific theories “stick their necks out”, where certain observations falsify the theory. There have been various criticisms of Popper’s falsification … Continue reading

Posted in Philosophy of Science | 10 Comments

A 5-case thought experiment for giving to charity

This post is a supplement to my previous post on Peter Singer’s argument on the life you can save. Most of us would not hesitate to save a drowning child when there is minimal cost to us, but we do hesitate when … Continue reading

Posted in Applied Ethics | Leave a comment

Elliott Sober’s Contrastive Empiricism

There has traditionally been a tension between empiricism and scientific realism.  Elliott Sober aims to combine important elements of the two in his Contrastive Empiricism.   In his paper “Contrastive Empiricism”, Sober defends a modest realism where “science properly aims to … Continue reading

Posted in Philosophy of Science | 1 Comment