Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #863Re: Scientist skeptical about their own discovery.
From: Gary Merrill
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:45
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:45
35 lines
2799 bytes
2799 bytes
In article <C165r8.Kt1@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>, sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner) writes: |> In article <C15vK7.B0p@unx.sas.com>, sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill) |> writes: |> |> [...] |> |> If I show you the photo and say "do you see *that*", *then* if you say "No" |> |> it is proper to say it isn't there for you. If you say "Yes", it certainly |> |> *is* there for you! I can *then* ask you, "What do you see this *as*?" or |> |> "What do you think this *is*?" or "Don't you think this is significant?". |> |> There is still a difference among all of "reporting as significant", |> |> "not reporting as significant", "not reporting at all", and "not seeing". |> |> The last is something for which one might seek medical treatment. If |> |> I see the duck instead of the rabbit, or the rabbit instead of the duck, |> |> my "perception" might be said to be skewed or deficient in some manner, |> |> but if I don't see *anything* (no lines, no shades of light and dark) |> |> I have another kind of problem altogether. |> |> The question is, what is his state before the line on the photo is pointed out |> to him? Sure, he is capable of seeing the line, but if he wasn't looking for |> it and therefore didn't notice it, did he see it? But a hypothesis concerning how perception is theory-laden seems rather empty here. There are *many* things that we don't see in this sense every day -- or that we see and forget we have seen. In addition, we all have had the experience of explicitly looking for something, the thing is where we are looking, and we *still* don't see it. (This happens all the time with my tools. I have the hypothesis that they actually *aren't* there until someone else looks for them, but my wife dismisses this as absurd.) I don't think these phenomena are addressed by appeal to theories that we may or may not hold. -- Gary H. Merrill [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development] SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC 27513 / (919) 677-8000 sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<C17I8G.D9B@unx.sas.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!concert!sas!mozart.unx.sas.com!sasghmReferences:
<C13uxG.F8G@unx.sas.com> <1993Jan19.154945.25457@samba.oit.unc.edu> <C140qp.Mz7@unx.sas.com> <1993Jan20.151253.26586@samba.oit.unc.edu> <C15vK7.B0p@unx.sas.com> <C165r8.Kt1@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!concert!sas!mozart.unx.sas.com!sasghm From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill) Subject: Re: Scientist skeptical about their own discovery. Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com Sender: news@unx.sas.com (Noter of Newsworthy Events) Message-ID: <C17I8G.D9B@unx.sas.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:45:52 GMT References: <C13uxG.F8G@unx.sas.com> <1993Jan19.154945.25457@samba.oit.unc.edu> <C140qp.Mz7@unx.sas.com> <1993Jan20.151253.26586@samba.oit.unc.edu> <C15vK7.B0p@unx.sas.com> <C165r8.Kt1@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU> Nntp-Posting-Host: theseus.unx.sas.com Organization: SAS Institute Inc. Lines: 35