align-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcamerachatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditfacebookglobegoogleimagesinstagramlocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartwitteryahoo

Hypotheses that cannot be resolved by evidence are worthless

This topics is at the heart of theory of knowledge, and is deliberately intended to provoke debate, so come ready top take sides - but also be ready to change!

Join or login to comment.

  • Vikay K.

    Every object in nature has a dependant nature, a perceived nature and a true nature. A hypothesis is one which explains the true nature of things. It may not be always possible to prove a hypothesis on the basis of dependent and perceived nature alone. True nature is essentially a metaphysical experience beyond proof.

    May 25, 2014

    • Vikay K.

      Tim - Thanks for setting the ball rolling. May be I can explain with a few examples in the meeting this afternoon.

      May 31, 2014

    • Vikay K.

      Tim - will you be posting a summary of our discussion for the information of all members who did not attend the meetup?

      June 4, 2014

  • Htat Wai Yan, I.

    I'm just a 15-16 year old kid, can i still go?

    1 · May 28, 2014

  • Anthony T.
    Robert Nozick Vs John Rawls. This is a video on an introduction to political philosophy. It is 40mins long, but halfway through the lecture, the lecturer compares Nozick and Rawls views side by side.
    This is a movie called The Man From Earth. It's about 5 people from different background (Physicist, Psychologist, Theologian) talking to a Man who claim to have lived on earth for 14000 years. In this movie, theory of evolution, origins of religion, consciousness etc is heavily discussed.

    This is a youtube channel which teaches you what each philosopher believe in a concise and easy to understand manner. The channel is called 'academyofideas'. Below is a video from it's channel on Mills. This channel covers extensively on Nietzsche and Socrates/Plato.

    May 31, 2014

    • Joe G.

      Wow, think u r more hardcore than most of us, in a good way :) don't ever stop reading, learning n growing :) have a good week ahead !

      June 2, 2014

    • Anthony T.

      You too :D

      June 2, 2014

  • Vikay K.

    To illustrate my concept of dependant nature and perceived nature, I would like to describe a simple incident in the run-up to our meeting today.

    Balan had ordered iced green tea. It was served in a tall glass with a characteristic yellowish-green colur with froth on top. Partha and myself instinctively asked Balan if he had ordered beer. Balan clarified that it is green tea and the owner of the shop vouched for it. The FORM of the object was as described. It was perceived as BEER but the perception was corrected on authentic third party testimony. The dependant nature of a glass of green tea with froth is transient because same glass can be used to serve another drink with similar characteristics as green tea. The perception if the drink could be beer was obviously wrong. Thus perceived nature is subject to the imagination of the Perceiver. In this case the perception was proved wrong by third party testimony. The drink itself can never say if it is green tea or beer.

    2 · May 31, 2014

  • Vikay K.

    The topic was a little general with discussion hovering on specific theories or hypotheses requiring a mid-course correction to make the discussion relevant to the subject.

    May 31, 2014

  • Vikay K.

    Tim - many thanks for today's meet-up. Would be nice if you can give a list of participants so that I can associate a name to the person. Please give in seating order starting from your left.

    Just to summarise my take from the meet-up, here is a short summary:
    1) The topic kicked off with a discussion centered on Scientific hypotheses rather than Social hypotheses. 2) Serene came with the definition that Hypotheses have to be falsifiable.
    3) My own contribution was:
    Statement is an assertion about an Object. When many persons make different assertions, it is human nature to see a relationship in the pattern of assertions and put forward a relational statement which becomes a Hypothesis. The hypothesis generates verifiable predictions which when confirmed upgrade the hypothesis to a theory or law of nature.
    Thoroughly enjoyed the discussion. Look forward to reading all posts with great interest.

    May 31, 2014

  • Vikay K.

    Tim-when you say Western-educated philosopher, you believe in the dictum "Seeing is Believing". This is at the root of all Western Hypotheses. I am tuned to Oriental Philosophies, which are based on the dictum "If you believe you can see the way, otherwise it is business as usual". You have to clarify the nature of the Hypotheses you are subjecting to the Test of Evidence. Even our present state of knowledge is continually subject to scrutiny and change. Therefore a Hypothesis which works at a particular point of time gets superseded or amplified later based on another set of evidence. What changes in this case is not the TRUTH but human perception of the TRUTH.

    May 31, 2014

  • ye bao q.

    Hi, I'll be late as I have a place to visit after lunch.

    May 30, 2014

  • Sue A.

    Is there any way for me to attend virtually? I have skype etc.

    May 26, 2014

19 went

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy