Read on Twitter
A problem with the name ‘critical rationalism’ is that “rational” means something *completely different* from what it means elsewhere (rat, post-rat, meta-rat, etc.)
Rationality is nothing to do with using explicit theories to reason, or measuring, or quantifying.
1/ https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1261079077424893965
In CR, ‘rationality’ is not how to tell whether your ideas are true.
Rationality is not acting to achieve your goals.
Rationality is not about logic or consistency.
Rationality is not about making good decisions.
Rationality is not about systems or methods.
2/
Rationality is not acting to achieve your goals.
Rationality is not about logic or consistency.
Rationality is not about making good decisions.
Rationality is not about systems or methods.
2/
According to Popper:
rationality = “readiness to accept criticism” (Unended Quest)
or ‘readiness to learn from one's mistakes’ (Myth of the Framework)
It’s a property of minds. Rational thought processes are ones that don’t entrench theories/errors.
3/
rationality = “readiness to accept criticism” (Unended Quest)
or ‘readiness to learn from one's mistakes’ (Myth of the Framework)
It’s a property of minds. Rational thought processes are ones that don’t entrench theories/errors.
3/
To be even more Popperian (looking at what it *excludes*), rationality is better thought of in contrast to irrationality —
irrationality = mental processes that hold some ideas immune from criticism
(Without this, there’s confusion about when ‘accepting criticism’ is good.)
4/
irrationality = mental processes that hold some ideas immune from criticism
(Without this, there’s confusion about when ‘accepting criticism’ is good.)
4/
Rationality is a property of people, not ideas.
A theory by itself cannot be rational.
A person, or processes within a person’s mind, can be rational.
Just like fallibility. A theory isn’t fallible, it is true or false. A person is fallible. A person can’t be true or false.
5/
A theory by itself cannot be rational.
A person, or processes within a person’s mind, can be rational.
Just like fallibility. A theory isn’t fallible, it is true or false. A person is fallible. A person can’t be true or false.
5/
A bonus concept from Deutsch:
anti-rational = sabotaging the means of correcting errors
irrational = errors chronically aren’t being corrected
Anti-rational is more ‘attacking the ability to do error-correction’, irrational is more ‘error-correction is not happening’.
6/
anti-rational = sabotaging the means of correcting errors
irrational = errors chronically aren’t being corrected
Anti-rational is more ‘attacking the ability to do error-correction’, irrational is more ‘error-correction is not happening’.
6/
Consider glueing down a puzzle piece.
You may not notice the effects until later.
‘Anti-rational’ is the glueing down of the piece.
‘Irrational’ is not changing the glued down piece when you find there’s a problem.
7/
You may not notice the effects until later.
‘Anti-rational’ is the glueing down of the piece.
‘Irrational’ is not changing the glued down piece when you find there’s a problem.
7/
Deutsch's view is:
rational = promotes explanatory knowledge
(Knowledge created by biological evolution, for example, isn’t ‘rational’ — it’s dumb evolution. This is a somewhat different sense of ‘rational’ from Popper, but his view includes Popper’s.)
8/
rational = promotes explanatory knowledge
(Knowledge created by biological evolution, for example, isn’t ‘rational’ — it’s dumb evolution. This is a somewhat different sense of ‘rational’ from Popper, but his view includes Popper’s.)
8/
9/
As we can see here, it doesn’t really make sense to define things.
Words have different meanings depending on their context, and can never be made perfectly sharp (and it would be the end of progress if they had to be).
But I hope this clarification of the framework helps.
As we can see here, it doesn’t really make sense to define things.
Words have different meanings depending on their context, and can never be made perfectly sharp (and it would be the end of progress if they had to be).
But I hope this clarification of the framework helps.
