Posts

Well, Johan Is Running That Way with a Rifle, and...

Hans is running in the same direction with a rifle, and Eugen is also doing that.

Methodological individualism says that is the way we have to explain Germany invading Belgium.

But that is wrong. Sometimes explanations run in the other direction. A storm explains the movement of the molecules involved in the storm. And "Germany has invaded Belgium" explains what Johan and Hans and Eugen are up to.



“The Wonders of Science”

Under this heading, one will be shown things such as luminescent fish, volcanoes, stellar clusters, Saturn’s rings, the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a butterfly, etc.
It is as though the person describing these things is trying to claim that these are the creations of science! These are not “wonders of science.“ They are the wonders of God’s creation. It is only the hubris of scientism that tries to claim them as our own creations!

Because it’s old, it must be dumb!

I recall Bryan Caplan deliberately (I believe) insulting Israel Kirzner at the NYU Market Process colloquium as follows: I had asked Bryan, "Well, according to your paper, a 'reasonable' conclusion depends upon what premises we start with. So if my initial premise is, 'The Bible is the word of God,' why should I not prefer scripture over scientific findings, when they conflict?"

Caplan, knowing full well that Kirzner is an orthodox rabbi, responded, essentially, "Who could possibly pay any attention to such stupid nonsense written by a bunch of desert shepherds several thousand years ago?"

At the time, I was so nonplussed by Bryan's response that I don't think I said anything more. But...

What I ought to have said was, "The work of these 'ignorant' desert shepherds is still being read several thousand years after they wrote it: do you think anyone will be reading a single thing you wrote in 4000 A.D.?"

What is amazing is, …

OK, what do you call this? "Re-bugging"?

I typed in some C++ code from Stroustrup's programming book. It is supposed to be the naive, inadequate first cut at addressing a problem. He offers some input that will show the shortcomings of the naive approach. I type in that input and...

It works perfectly!

Now I have to "re-bug" my program to determine why it is not failing like it is supposed to!

Incorrect Spam Designations

A few comments, especially from Prateek and Ken B, were being automatically marked as spam. I just went in the Blogger spam bucket for the first time in several months and found them.

My apologies.

"The sun is a symbol...

of the risen Christ."

Response A: No it isn't! It is a ball of flaming hydrogen!

"The Mona Lisa is a symbol of the mysteries of feminine beauty."

Response B: No it isn't! It is a bunch of pigments spread across a canvas!

Response A makes no more sense than Response B.

Who Am I?

Pretend you are on one of those Guess-My-Line-style gameshows. Could you name the following person?

"I have been referred to as inarguably 'the most original and the most versatile intellect that the Americas have so far produced... because any second would be so far behind as not to be worth nominating.' I was accomplished as a mathematician, astronomer, chemist, geodesist, surveyor, cartographer, metrologist, spectroscopist, engineer, inventor, psychologist, philologist, lexicographer, historian of science, mathematical economist, book reviewer, dramtist, actor, short story writer, phenomenologist, semiotician, logician, rhetorician, and metaphysician. I developed a cardinal arithmetic for infinite numbers years before Cantor, axiomatized natural number arithmetic before Dedekind and Peano, and set out axiomatized set theory before Zermelo. Fifty years before Shannon, I described how Boolean logic could be implemented in electrical switches.

"Karl Popper described…