3 responses

  1. Luke
    July 26, 2011

    Great article. I’ve evolved from an empiricist into a rationalist tradition these last few years, in no small part due to the convinving arguments laid out by Mises, Rothbard and, most recently, of Hoppe. Especially after hearing Mises’ strong critique of mathematical and empirical macroeconomics, I became ever more suspicious of what academics were passing off as reasoned argument and “science”.

    I think that Popper is fundamentally in error on a number of core issues to do with the scientific method, and rational vs empirical knowledge — although I actually disagree with many of Hoppe’s excellent arguments as to WHY he’s wrong. A few minor points of contention really.

    Like many of the philosophers before him, I claim that Popper too misunderstood the difference between two fundamental aspects of human Reason:
    * Logical or tautological systems (formal, modal, fuzzy, math, etc) having to do EXCLUSIVELY with artificial or abstract CONCEPTS.
    * Rationality (explanations of reality itself), i.e of interacting physical OBJECTS (objects which exist: i.e. shape + location).

    Reaility is NOT tautologous. It is just… what it is. We can only rationally explain it; but never “prove” it absolutely (with omniscience). Conversely, ALL logic systems are tautologous.

    We merely point at objects and utter a corresponding mouth noise. We do not and cannot “know” reality directly, but only through our subjective senses (which can and do fool us; hence rationality). Science is objective because it is rigorous with definitions and rational (i.e. deals with existing or hypothesized OBJECTS — their mechanics — via explanations… in order to *visualize* so as to understand/communicate).

    The current state of tax-funded of science is a circus. Physics has all but been erradicated by mathematicians engaging in Ptolemaic circularity and reification of concepts into objects (scientific fraud, essentially). They believe that time, space, and energy are physical entities (i.e. to do with Physics) rather than just mathematical quantities and abstractions. They continue to propose hyper-dimensions and surrealistic zero-d particles and wave-packets. To this day, not a single phycist on Earth who can even draw any one of the hundreds of particles “predicted” by the standard model of quantum, even thoguh they claim every day to verify them inside reassuringly expensive particle colliders.

    Meanwhile the “empirical” state economists and social theorists (also largely hijacked by mathematicians and relativists) engage in similar practices; immoral social and financial “experiments” on a frightening scale.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

Back to top
mobile desktop