Recent human crash-landing on Sainte-Anneþ

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 10 Jan 2011, 18:43 · from 2011-January.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: danldo at gmail.com (Dan'l Danehy-Oakes)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:43:54 -0800
Subject: (urth)
	=?iso-8859-1?q?Recent_human_crash-landing_on_Sainte-Anne?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=FE?=
In-Reply-To: <SNT123-W29D83B8D0B31E75CD191C2CF0E0 at phx.gbl>
References: <SNT123-W29D83B8D0B31E75CD191C2CF0E0 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikkMfKiM5SeH04XbgRSpnA_69-HAn8N+c_Toaj5 at mail.gmail.com>

Lee,

You are using too narrow a definition of "prediction" and "falsifiability."

For sciences like paleontology, astrophysics, cosmology, etc., the
ability to create "experiments" is limited. What constitutes
"prediction" in a theory is that it successfully explains the
available evidence. What I mean is this: if in looking at fossils A,
B, and C I come up with a theory T that also turns out to successfully
explain fossils X, Y, and Z, then T has made a successful prediction,
and is more likely to be true; if, on the other hand, fossils X, Y,
and Z contradict T, then T has been falsified.

In the case of literary discussion, the "available evidence" is the
text at hand, as a whole and in parts.

If, in looking at Horn's experience in the pit, a reader comes up with
an idea I that also explains some details of his encounter with
He-Pen-Sheep, then I has made a successful prediction, and is more
likely to be true; if, on the other hand, the details of inhumi
reproduction contradict I, then I has been falsified.

I am not suggesting that literary criticism and theory have the
epistemological status of the sciences. I am, however, suggesting that
the methods of the sciences can be used to make literary criticism and
theory more useful.

-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net