>> Good points all, but when in the throes of evaluating a model's relative impetus, validity, reliability, and areas of applicability, there are also the specific fields(s) being investigated, & the supposed theoretical breadth & depth of the individual model's coverage to be considered. For example, you may be acquainted with the statistical & hierarchical-based model of *Bruce Bueno de Mesquita*... I'd provide some links, but it is just as simple for you to "Google." >> While he offers some methodological touchstones, he chooses *not* to reveal the model's proprietary "breakdown," as it does evidently help him to earn a significant part of his bread & butter. So, I guess there is no way to actually peruse his working model.
Anyway, he freely suggests that the principles upon which he relies are nothing new, but the ways in which his categorization elements and vector matrices (emphases placed) are produced is. Oddly, despite the seeming simplicity (relatively speaking) of his model, its predictive reliability has no modern rival... I encourage you to check him out... On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:59 AM, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com>wrote: > On Oct 27, 10:52 pm, Scott Mayers <scottmay...@shaw.ca> wrote: > >... > > I am skeptical of today's dependence on induction in physics with > > contrary and contradictory views on deduction and normal logical > > method, how and when proponents choose and choose not to use it. > >... > > And, where does statistics fit in with your perception of reality? > > Explanation without prediction is just entertainment. All > entertainment is frivolous, therefore explanation without prediction > is frivolous. In prediction, one uses a model. Have you taken a poll > of physicists to see what percentage believe that their models are > completely accurate predictors? I am going to guess that you will > find almost none. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Epistemology" group. > To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<epistemology%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
