The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World

That is to say, the theory must make predictions which, if the theory were false, could be contradicted by the outcome of some possible observation. Thus, although scientific theories are not derived from experience, they can be tested by experience – by observation or experiment.

If the explanations of physical phenomena were evident in their appearance, empiricism would be true and there would be no need for science as we know it.

conflicting ideas in a broader sense are the occasion for all rational thought and inquiry.

Yet, when myths were altered or superseded by other myths over the course of centuries, the new ones were almost never any closer to the truth.

In general, when theories are easily variable in the sense I have described, experimental testing is almost useless for correcting their errors. I call such theories bad explanations. Being proved wrong by experiment, and changing the theories to other bad explanations, does not get their holders one jot closer to the truth.

However, there are plenty of very simple explanations that are nevertheless easily variable (such as ‘Demeter did it’).

Empiricism said that we derive it from sensory experience. This is false. The real source of our theories is conjecture, and the real source of our knowledge is conjecture alternating with criticism.

The universe is not there to overwhelm us; it is our home, and our resource. The bigger the better.

although progress has no necessary end, it does have a necessary beginning: a cause, or an event with which it starts, or a necessary condition for it to take off and to thrive.

Thus empiricists came to believe that, in addition to rejecting ancient authority and tradition, scientists should suppress or ignore any new ideas they might have, except those that had been properly ‘derived’ from experience.