> Again, makes no sense to me. Scientists make predictions to
> test their models. Are these models consistent with data? --A
> meaningful question. Do these models work? --A meaningful
> question. Do these models accurately represent
> reality? --Silly metaphysics.
As you know, "data" means "givens" in Latin. So who or what gives them? Could it be the "real world"?
How do you distinguish data that are veridical perceptions from hallucinations or other perceptual mistakes? Why do models that work, work and models that don't, don't?
Looks as though some "metaphysical" questions are left over...
(It sounds to me as though you are fairly close to Hume, as many scientists are even today. But there are problems with Hume's account of science ...)
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax