982
edits
Evidence: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(→Discord: new section) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Message | {{Message | ||
|Author=joelchan86 | |||
|Avatar=https://cdn.discordapp.com/avatars/322545403876868096/6dd171845a7a4e30603d98ae510c77b8.png?size=1024 | |||
|Date Sent=22-11-11 19:01:10 | |||
|Channel=what is obsidian-logseq-roam | |||
|Text=i agree it's not universal! my feeling is that [[Claim]]: a statement (claim or evidence) might be the more universal element: | |||
- empirical work also consists of statements about the world (this is less controversial) | |||
- design/technological innovation rests in part on claims about a) what is needed in the world, what is hard to do, constraints, and b) what is needed to succeed: examples here: https://deepscienceventures.com/content/the-outcomes-graph-2 (h/t <@559775193242009610>) | |||
- theories often consist of systems of core claims (e.g., in models like what <@824740026575355906> and <@734802666441408532> are working with, where we can think of the claims as subgraphs of the overall knowledge graph) | |||
see, e.g., [[Evidence]] from this review of models of scientific knowledge https://publish.obsidian.md/joelchan-notes/discourse-graph/evidence/EVD+-+Four+positivist+epistemological+models+from+philosophy+of+science%2C+including+Popper%2C+emphasiz...+statements+as+a+core+component+of+scientific+knowledge+-+%40harsDesigningScientificKnowledge2001 | |||
and [[Evidence]] convergence/contrasts across users of the [[Roam Discourse Graph extension]] in terms of building blocks: common thread across all was Evidence | |||
|Link=https://discord.com/channels/1029514961782849607/1040600256485797889/1040702747659489391 | |||
}}{{Message | |||
|Author=joelchan86 | |Author=joelchan86 | ||
|Avatar=https://cdn.discordapp.com/avatars/322545403876868096/6dd171845a7a4e30603d98ae510c77b8.png?size=1024 | |Avatar=https://cdn.discordapp.com/avatars/322545403876868096/6dd171845a7a4e30603d98ae510c77b8.png?size=1024 | ||