🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #447

Re: Measurement & Precision

#447
From: Cosma Shalizi
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 02:11
37 lines
2819 bytes
In article <1992Nov2.043143.24298@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU> dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott) writes:
>Imagine you are a stone age philosopher. All you have are your big chunky
>stone tools to work with to engineer with for everyday life.
>You produce a persuasive argument that it is impossible to ever produce
>tools, machines and measurements that are accurate to within micrometers
>(or fractions of a camel's hair).
>It is obvious to you that your coarse implements can't measure to any greater
>accuracy than they are already and so engineering to greater precision
>is philosophically impossible, by simple inductive reasoning.
>Where is the flaw in his argument?
   1. Induction is not valid. This has been known for some time. There are
      many inductive arguments which are rational - the fact that all observed
      crows have been black _is_ reason to believe that all crows are black -
      but not valid, the way, "All men are mortal, and Socrates is a man,
      therefore Socrates is mortal" is valid.
   2. This is not a philosophical argument but an engineering one. "With our
      current technology, it is impossible to make things finer than a 
      camel's hair, and we can think of no ways of improving things to get
      around this limitation." This is a very sound argument. With stone age
      techniques and science, there is no way to make tools or measurements
      of the desired accuracy.
>I'm wondering to what extent we are tricking ourselves with words
>(like the stone age man example did) today when we grapple with such
>philosophical mysteries as quantum mechanics, mind-body problem,
>determinism v. free will etc.
   I have yet to see arguments - serious, competent arguments - advanced on
those problems that depended on the state of our engineering. Certainly this
is not the problem with quantum mechanics. In brief: No - not like your
stone age philosopher was.
P.S. See Ch. 4 of _The Plato Cult_ in re pseudo-questions, Derek.

	Cosma Rohilla Shalizi
	In Real Life: lizi@ocf or lizi@soda .berkeley.edu
	larval physicist
-- 
"What's the use of being an American citizen if I can't swear when I
damn well want to?" - My mother, while waiting in line in Heathrow
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1dck8fINNgie@agate.berkeley.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!olivea!charnel!rat!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!agate!soda.berkeley.edu!lizi
References: <1992Nov2.043143.24298@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!olivea!charnel!rat!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!agate!soda.berkeley.edu!lizi
From: lizi@soda.berkeley.edu (Cosma Shalizi)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,sci.physics,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Measurement & Precision
Message-ID: <1dck8fINNgie@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 6 Nov 92 02:11:27 GMT
References: <1992Nov2.043143.24298@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU>
Organization: Campsu Crusade for Cthulhu (Berkeley Tentacle)
Lines: 37
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu