Theory quotes

From Motley Bytes Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Christopher_Wolfgang_Alexander

Time for Equilibrium

“Misfit provides an incentive to change; good fit provides none. In theory the process is eventually bound to reach the equilibrium of well-fitting forms. However, for the fit to occur in practice, one vital condition must be satisfied. It must have time to happen. The process must be able to achieve equilibrium before the next culture change upsets it again... The direct response is the feedback of the process. If the process is to maintain the good fit ... while the culture drifts, it needs a feedback sensitive enough to take action the moment that one of the potential failures actually occurs.”

Herbert_George_Andrewartha

Model Making

“Model-making, the imaginative and logical steps which precede the experiment, may be judged the most valuable part of the scientific method because skill and insight in these matters are rare. Without them, we do not know what experiment to do. But it is the experiment which provides the raw material for scientific theory. Scientific theory cannot be built directly from the conclusions of conceptual models.”
  • Source: Herbert George Andrewartha, Introduction to the Study of Animal Population (1961), 181.

Thomas_Aquinas

Reason

“Reason may be employed in two ways to establish a point: first for the purpose of furnishing sufficient proof of some principle, as in natural science, where sufficient proof can be brought to show that the movement of the heavens is always of uniform velocity. Reason is employed in another way, not as furnishing a sufficient proof of a principle, but as confirming an already established principle, by showing the congruity of its results, as in astrology the theory of eccentrics and epicycles is considered as established because thereby the sensible appearances of the heavenly movements can be explained; not, however, as if this reason were sufficient, since some other theory might explain them.”
  • Source: Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica [1266-1273], Part I, question 32, article 2 (reply to objection 2), trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (i.e. L. Shapeote), revised D. J. Sullivan (1952), Vol. I, 177.

Isaac_Asimov

Science Uncertainty

“Science is uncertain. Theories are subject to revision; observations are open to a variety of interpretations, and scientists quarrel amongst themselves. This is disillusioning for those untrained in the scientific method, who thus turn to the rigid certainty of the Bible instead. There is something comfortable about a view that allows for no deviation and that spares you the painful necessity of having to think.”
  • Source: Isaac Asimov, The ‘Threat’ of Creationism. In Ashley Montagu (ed.), Science and Creationism, published 1984, page 192.

Jim_Baggott

The Fact Principle

“The Fact Principle. Our knowledge and understanding of empirical reality are founded on verified scientific facts derived from careful observation and experiment. But the facts themselves are not theory-neutral. Observation and experiment are simply not possible without reference to a supporting theory of some kind.”
  • Source: Baggott, Jim. Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth (p. 12). Pegasus Books. New York, NY.

The Theory Principle

“The Theory Principle. Although physical theories are constructed to describe empirical facts about reality, they are nevertheless founded on abstract mathematical (we could even say metaphysical) concepts. The process of abstraction from facts to theories is highly complex, intuitive and not subject to simple, universal rules applicable to all science for all time. In the act of scientific creation, any approach is in principle valid provided it yields a theory that works.”
  • Source: Baggott, Jim. Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth (p. 17). Pegasus Books. New York, NY.

The Testability Principle

“The Testability Principle. The principal requirement of a scientific theory is that it should in some way be testable through reference to existing or new facts about empirical reality. The test exposes the veracity or falsity of the theory, but there is a caveat. The working stuff of theories is itself abstract and metaphysical. Getting this stuff to apply to the facts or a test situation typically requires wrapping the abstract concepts in a blanket of auxiliary assumptions; some explicitly stated, many taken as read. This means that a test is rarely decisive. When a test shows that a theory is false, the theory is not necessarily abandoned. It may simply mean that one or more of the auxiliary assumptions are wrong.”
  • Source: Baggott, Jim. Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth (p. 20). Pegasus Books. New York, NY.

The Veracity Principle

“The Veracity Principle. It is not possible to verify a scientific theory such that it provides absolute certainty for all time. A theory is instead accepted (or even tolerated), on the basis of its ability to survive the tests and meet additional criteria of simplicity, efficacy, utility, explanatory power and less rational, innately human measures such as beauty. Over time the theory becomes familiar and is accepted as ‘true’ or, at least, as possessing a high truth-likeness or verisimilitude. The scientists’ confidence or degree of belief in the theory grows. It is eventually absorbed into the common body of knowledge which forms the current ‘authorized’ version of empirical reality.”
  • Source: Baggott, Jim. Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth (p. 22). Pegasus Books. New York, NY.

John_Stewart_Bell

Clean Theory

“That is to say, I’m a professional theoretical physicist and I would like to make a clean theory. And when I look at quantum mechanics I see that it’s a dirty theory.”
  • Source: John Stewart Bell in an interview recorded in the book “The Ghost in the Atom” by P.C.W. Davies and J.R. Brown, published in 1986 by Cambridge University Press. Chapter 3.

Francis_Bello

Facts Alone

“Facts alone, no matter how numerous or verifiable, do not automatically arrange themselves into an intelligible, or truthful, picture of the world. It is the task of the human mind to invent a theoretical framework to account for them.”
  • Source: Francis Bello, In Francis Bello, Lawrence Lessing and George A.W. Boehm, Great American Scientists (1960, 1961), 116.

Claude_Bernard

Observer and Experimenter

“The observer does not reason, he notes; the experimenter, on the other hand, reasons and grounds himself on acquired facts, to imagine and induce rationally other facts. But though in theory and abstractly we may differentiate observers from experimenters, it seems impossible to separate them in practice.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter I, page 25. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Hypothesis Theory Reason

“A scientific hypothesis is merely a scientific idea, preconceived or pre-visioned. A theory is merely a scientific idea controlled by experiment. Reasoning merely gives a form to our ideas, so that everything, first and last, leads back to an idea.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter I, page 26. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Trust

“The great experimental principle, then, is doubt... We must trust our observations or our theories only after experimental verification. If we trust too much, the mind becomes bound and cramped by the results of its own reasoning; it no longer has freedom of action, and so lacks the power to break away from that blind faith in theories which is only scientific superstition.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter II, page 37. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Excessive Faith

“Men who have excessive faith in their theories or ideas are not only ill prepared for making discoveries, they also make very poor observations.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter II, page 38. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Alter Theory Not Nature

“The theories which embody our scientific ideas as a whole are, of course, indispensable as representations of science. They should also serve as a basis for new ideas. But as these theories and ideas are by no means immutable truth, one must always be ready to abandon them, to alter them or to exchange them as soon as they cease to represent the truth. In a word, we must alter theory to adapt it to nature, but not nature to adapt it to theory.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter II, page 39. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Theory Overthrow

“When we have put forward an idea or a theory in science, our object must not be to preserve it by seeking everything that may support it and setting aside everything that may weaken it. On the contrary, we ought to examine with the greatest care the facts which apparently would overthrow it.”
  • Source: From the book "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine" written by Claude Bernard published in French in 1865 as "Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale". Translated to English by Henry Copley Greene in 1927 and republished by Henry Shuman, Inc. in 1949. Chapter II, page 40. Available online at https://archive.org/details/b21270557 retrieved 2024.

Arthur_Bloch

Finagle's Second Law

“No matter what the anticipated result, there will always be someone eager to (a) misinterpret it, (b) fake it, (c) believe it happened to his own pet theory.”
  • Source: Attributed to a fictional character named Finagle, reported in the book "Murphy's Law and Other Reasons Why Things Go Wrong" written by Arthur Bloch, first edition published in 1977 by Price/Stern/Sloan, Los Angeles, California. ISBN-10: 0843104287. ISBN-13: 978-0843104288. Chapter Murphology, page 15.

David_Bohm

Theory Purpose

“we must avoid postulating a new element for each new phenomenon. But an equally serious mistake is to admit into the theory only those elements which can now be observed. For the purpose of a theory is not only to correlate the results of observations that we already know how to make, but also to suggest the need for new kinds of observations and to predict their results. In fact, the better a theory is able to suggest the need for new kinds of observations and to predict their results correctly, the more confidence we have that this theory is likely to be good representation of the actual properties of matter and not simply an empirical system especially chosen in such a way as to correlate a group of already known facts.”
  • Source: David Bohm in the paper “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables. II”. Published January 1952 in Physical Review volume 35 issue 2.

Niels_Bohr

Theory and Experiment

“When theory and experiment agree, that is the time to be especially suspicious.”

Robert_N_Britcher

Programming Not Science

“Programming is not a science, and there is no theory of programming. If there were, everyone would approach programming the same way.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 17.

Theory Informs Programming

“...theory has informed Programming largely through programming languages.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 18.

Theory and Programming

“...when it comes to programming, theory and practice may never be on speaking terms.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 18.

Complexity of Practice

“The complexity of practice has always dwarfed the simplicity of theory.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 111.

Knowing Versus Doing

“We should not give up because there is no unified field theory of software engineering. The elements may not be easy to implement, but they are relatively simple, especially when compared with the study of proteins. ... The problem is not that we do not know enough. The problem is that we do not practice what we know.”
  • Source: Britcher, Robert N. (1999). The Limits of Software: People, Projects, and Perspectives. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. ISBN 0-201-43323-0. Page 209.

Theories and Truth

“There are theories for just about everything; truth is no exception.”

Keywords: Theory_quotes Truth_quotes

Samuel_Butler

Scientific Mind

"The best class of scientific mind is the same as the best class of business mind. The great desideratum in either case is to know how much evidence is enough to warrant action. It is as unbusiness-like to want too much evidence before buying or selling as to be content with too little. The same kind of qualities are wanted in either case. The difference is that if the business man makes a mistake, he commonly has to suffer for it, whereas it is rarely that scientific blundering, so long as it is confined to theory, entails loss on the blunderer. On the contrary it very often brings him fame, money and a pension. Hence the business man, if he is a good one, will take greater care not to overdo or underdo things than the scientific man can reasonably be expected to take."
  • Source: Samuel Butler, Henry Festing Jones (ed.), The Note-Books of Samuel Butler (1917), 217.

Fritjof_Capra

Quantum Theory Acceptance

"The mathematical framework of quantum theory has passed countless successful tests and is now universally accepted as a consistent and accurate description of all atomic phenomena. The verbal interpretation, on the other hand – i.e., the metaphysics of quantum theory – is on far less solid ground. In fact, in more than forty years physicists have not been able to provide a clear metaphysical model."
  • Source: Fritjof Capra, In The Tao of Physics (1975), 132.

Thomas_Chrowder_Chamberlin

Scientific Study

"In scientific study, or, as I prefer to phrase it, in creative scholarship, the truth is the single end sought; all yields to that. The truth is supreme, not only in the vague mystical sense in which that expression has come to be a platitude, but in a special, definite, concrete sense. Facts and the immediate and necessary inductions from facts displace all pre-conceptions, all deductions from general principles, all favourite theories. Previous mental constructions are bowled over as childish play-structures by facts as they come rolling into the mind. The dearest doctrines, the most fascinating hypotheses, the most cherished creations of the reason and of the imagination perish from a mind thoroughly inspired with the scientific spirit in the presence of incompatible facts. Previous intellectual affections are crushed without hesitation and without remorse. Facts are placed before reasonings and before ideals, even though the reasonings and the ideals be more beautiful, be seemingly more lofty, be seemingly better, be seemingly truer. The seemingly absurd and the seemingly impossible are sometimes true. The scientific disposition is to accept facts upon evidence, however absurd they may appear to our pre-conceptions."
  • Source: Thomas Chrowder Chamberlin, The Ethical Functions of Scientific Study: An Address Delivered at the Annual Commencement of the University of Michigan, 28 June 1888, 7-8

Marvin_Chester

Mathematical Quantum Predictions

"The mathematical predictions of quantum mechanics yield results that are in agreement with experimental findings. That is the reason we use quantum theory. That quantum theory fits experiment is what validates the theory, but why experiment should give such peculiar results is a mystery. This is the shock to which Bohr referred."'


Nigel_Cross

Conventional Problem Solving

"Conventional wisdom about problem-solving seems often to be contradicted by the behavior of expert designers. But designing has many differences from conventional problem-solving. ... we must be very wary about importing models of design behavior from other fields. Empirical studies of design activity have frequently found 'intuitive' features of design ability to be the most effective and relevant to the intrinsic nature of design. Some aspects of design theory, however, have tried to develop counter-intuitive models and prescriptions for design behavior."

Charles_Darwin

Good Observer Theory

"I have an old belief that a good observer really means a good theorist."

Keywords: Belief_quotes Observation_quotes Theory_quotes Good_quotes

Observation versus Theory

"About thirty years ago there was much talk that geologists ought only to observe and not theorize; and I well remember someone saying that at this rate a man might as well go into a gravel-pit and count the pebbles and describe the colours. How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service."

Paul_Davies

Models and Theories and Reality

"Until now, physical theories have been regarded as merely models with approximately describe the reality of nature. As the models improve, so the fit between theory and reality gets closer. Some physicists are now claiming that supergravity is the reality, that the model and the real world are in mathematically perfect accord."
  • Source: P.C.W. Davies, Superforce (1984, 1985), 149.

W_Edwards_Deming

Theory is a Window

"Theory is a window into the world. Theory leads to prediction. Without prediction, experience and examples teach nothing."
  • Source: W. Edwards Deming, In the book The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education;; (1993), 103. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

David_Deutsch

Common Sense

“Our best theories are not only truer than common sense, they make more sense than common sense...”

Theory Rejection

“The overwhelming majority of theories are rejected because they contain bad explanations, not because they fail experimental tests.”

Theory of Computation

“The theory of computation has traditionally been studied almost entirely in the abstract, as a topic in pure mathematics. This is to miss the point of it. Computers are physical objects, and computations are physical processes. What computers can or cannot compute is determined by the laws of physics alone, and not by pure mathematics.”

Amending Data

“Amending the ‘data’, or rejecting some as erroneous, is a frequent concomitant of scientific discovery, and the crucial ‘data’ cannot even be obtained until theory tells us what to look for and how and why.”
  • Source: David Deutsch, The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World (2011).

Data Interpretation

“We never know any data before interpreting it through theories. All observations are, as Popper put it, theory-laden, and hence fallible, as all our theories are.”
  • Source: David Deutsch, The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World (2011).

Arthur_Conan_Doyle

Exhaust Natural Explanations

“Yet we must exhaust all natural explanations before we fall back upon such a theory as this.”
  • Source: Words of the fictional character Sherlock Holmes. Written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the short story “The Adventure of the Devil's Foot”. Published in 1910 as part of the series “His Last Bow”. Online at <https://sherlock-holm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1-sided/devi.pdf>, retrieved 2024.

David_Epstein

Creativity

“There is, to be sure, no comprehensive theory of creativity.”
  • Source: David Epstein in the book “Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World”. Published 2019 by Riverhead Books. Chapter 9, page 198. ISBN 978-0735214484.

Michael_Faraday

Assertion Duties

“A man who makes assertions, or draws conclusions, regarding any given case, ought to be competent to investigate it. He has no right to throw the onus on others, declaring it their duly to prove him right or wrong. His duty is to demonstrate the truth of that which he asserts, or to cease from asserting. The men he calls upon to consider and judge have enough to do with themselves, in the examination, correction, or verification of their own views. The world little knows how many of the thoughts and theories which have passed through the mind of a scientific investigator have been crushed in silence and secrecy by his own severe criticism and adverse examination; that in the most successful instances not a tenth of the suggestions, the hopes, the wishes, the preliminary conclusions have been realized.”
  • Source: Lecturer=Michael Faraday; Lecture/Title=“Observations on Mental Education: A Lecture Delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain Before H.R.H. Prince Albert”; Date=1854-05-06; Book/Title=“Lectures on Education”; Publication/Date=1855; Book/Title=“Experimental Researches in Chemistry and Physics”; Publication/Date=1859); Page=486.

Paul_Feyerabend

Theory Never Agrees with All Facts

“No single theory ever agrees with all the facts in its domain.”
  • Source: Paul Feyerabend, Against Method (1st ed.) (1975) p. 33
    • Paul Feyerabend, Against Method (3rd ed.) (1993) p. 39

Keywords: Fact_quotes Theory_quotes Domain_quotes Uncertainty_quotes

Richard_Feynman

Classical Theory

“... I'm not happy with all the analyses that go with just the classical theory, because nature isn't classical, dammit. And if you want to make a simulation of nature, you'd better make it quantum mechanical, and, by golly, it's a wonderful problem because it doesn't look so easy.”
  • Source: Article/Title: “Simulating Physics with Computers”; Journal/Name: International Journal of Theoretical Physics; Volume: 21; Publication/Date: 1982; Page: 486.

Murray_Gell-Mann

Curiosity

“My colleagues in elementary particle theory in many lands [and I] are driven by the usual insatiable curiosity of the scientist, and our work is a delightful game. I am frequently astonished that it so often results in correct predictions of experimental results. How can it be that writing down a few simple and elegant formulae, like short poems governed by strict rules such as those of the sonnet or the waka, can predict universal regularities of Nature?”
  • Source: Murray Gell-Mann, Nobel Banquet Speech (10 Dec 1969), in Wilhelm Odelberg (ed.),Les Prix Nobel en 1969 (1970).

Rudy_Giuliani

Evidence

“We’ve got lots of theories. We just don’t have the evidence.”

Keywords: Theory_quotes Evidence_quotes

Nelson_Goodman

Simple Theories

“For if as scientists we seek simplicity, then obviously we try the simplest surviving theory first, and retreat from it only when it proves false. Not this course, but any other, requires explanation. If you want to go somewhere quickly, and several alternate routes are equally likely to be open, no one asks why you take the shortest. The simplest theory is to be chosen not because it is the most likely to be true but because it is scientifically the most rewarding among equally likely alternatives. We aim at simplicity and hope for truth.”
  • Source: Nelson Goodman, Problems and Projects (1972), 352.

John_Gribbin

Scientific Method

“The Big Idea that had been developed in the seventeenth century ... is now known as the scientific method. It says that the way to proceed when investigating how the world works is to first carry out experiments and/or make observations of the natural world. Then, develop hypotheses to explain these observations, and (crucially) use the hypothesis to make predictions about the future outcome of future experiments and/or observations. After comparing the results of those new observations with the predictions of the hypotheses, discard those hypotheses which make false predictions, and retain (at least, for the time being) any hypothesis that makes accurate predictions, elevating it to the status of a theory. Note that a theory can never be proved right. The best that can be said is that it has passed all the tests applied so far.”
  • Source: John R. Gribbin. In The Fellowship: the Story of a Revolution (2005), 275.

William_Rowan_Hamilton

Theory and Hypothesis

“This word [theoryJ is employed by English writers in a very loose and improper sense. It is with them usually convertible into hypothesis, and hypothesis is commonly used as another term for conjecture. The terms theory and theoretical are properly used in opposition to the terms practice and practical. In this sense they were exclusively employed by the ancients; and in this sense they are almost exclusively employed by the continental philosophers.”
  • Source: Written by William Rowan Hamilton. Recorded in the book 'Isaac Asimov’s Book of Science and Nature Quotations, edited by Isaac Asimov and Jason A. Shulman, published in 1988 by Weidenfeld and Nicolson, New York. Chapter 84, quote number 84.9, page 325. ISBN 1-555-84111-2.

Stephen_Hawking

Correspondence to Reality

“I don't demand that a theory corresponds to reality because I don't know what it is. Reality is not a quality you can test with litmus paper. All I'm concerned with is that the theory should predict the results of experiment.”
  • Source: During a debate with Roger Penrose in 1994 at the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge, transcribed in The Nature of Space and Time (1996) by Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose, Princeton, NJ: Princeton Umiversity Press, p. 121.

Robert_Heinlein

Scientific Method

“There are but two ways of forming an opinion in science. One is the scientific method; the other, the scholastic. One can judge from experiment, or one can blindly accept authority. To the scientific mind, experimental proof is all important and theory is merely a convenience in description, to be junked when it no longer fits. To the academic mind, authority is everything and facts are junked when they do not fit theory laid down by authority.”.
  • Source: Written by Robert A. Heinlein in the short story “Life-Line” originally published in the 1939-08 edition of “Astounding Science Fiction” magazine, page 83. Character: Dr. Pinero. Retrieved 2024-05-05 from https://www.luminist.org/archives/SF/AST.htm.

Mary_Hesse

Analogy or Model

“…one of the main functions of an analogy or model is to suggest extensions of the theory by considering extensions of the analogy, since more is known about the analogy than is known about the subject matter of the theory itself… A collection of observable concepts in a purely formal hypothesis suggesting no analogy with anything would consequently not suggest either any directions for its own development.”
  • Source: Mary B. Hesse, 'Operational Definition and Analogy in Physical Theories', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (Feb 1952), 2, No. 8, 291.

Donald_Hoffman

Demystify Consciousness

“Cats can't do calculus and monkeys can't do quantum theory, so why assume that Homo sapiens can demystify consciousness?”
  • Source: Donald Hoffman in his book “The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes”. Published by W. W. Norton, New York, NY, in 2019. ISBN 978-0393254693. Chapter 1, page 33.

Fred_Hoyle

Scientific Hypotheses

“It is often held that scientific hypotheses are constructed, and are to be constructed, only after a detailed weighing of all possible evidence bearing on the matter, and that then and only then may one consider, and still only tentatively, any hypotheses. This traditional view however, is largely incorrect, for not only is it absurdly impossible of application, but it is contradicted by the history of the development of any scientific theory. What happens in practice is that by intuitive insight, or other inexplicable inspiration, the theorist decides that certain features seem to him more important than others and capable of explanation by certain hypotheses. Then basing his study on these hypotheses the attempt is made to deduce their consequences. The successful pioneer of theoretical science is he whose intuitions yield hypotheses on which satisfactory theories can be built, and conversely for the unsuccessful (as judged from a purely scientific standpoint).”
  • Source: Sir Fred Hoyle, Co-author with British astronomer, Raymond Arthur Lyttleton (1911-95), 'The Internal Constitution of the Stars', Occasional Notes of the Royal Astronomical Society 1948, 12, 90.

Edwin_Hubble

Scientific Judgments

“Science deals with judgments on which it is possible to obtain universal agreement. These judgments do not concern individual facts and events, but the invariable association of facts and events known as the laws of science. Agreement is secured by observation and experiment — impartial courts of appeal to which all men must submit if they wish to survive. The laws are grouped and explained by theories of ever increasing generality. The theories at first are ex post facto — merely plausible interpretations of existing bodies of data. However, they frequently lead to predictions that can be tested by experiments and observations in new fields, and, if the interpretations are verified, the theories are accepted as working hypotheses until they prove untenable. The essential requirements are agreement on the subject matter and the verification of predictions. These features insure a body of positive knowledge that can be transmitted from person to person, and that accumulates from generation to generation.”
  • Source: Edwin Powell Hubble. From manuscript on English Science in the Renaissance (1937), Edwin Hubble collection, Box 2, Huntington Library, San Marino, California. As cited by Norriss S. Hetherington in 'Philosophical Values and Observation in Edwin Hubble's Choice of a Model of the Universe', Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences (1982), 13, No. 1, 41. (Hetherington comments parenthetically that the references to court, judgment and appeal may be attributable to his prior experiences as a Rhodes Scholar reading Roman law at Oxford, and to a year's practice as an attorney in Louisville, Kentucky.)

Thomas_Henry_Huxley

Tragedy of Science

“The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly fact.”
  • Source: Thomas Henry Huxley speaking at the Presidential Address at the British Association, "Biogenesis and abiogenesis" (1870). Retrieved from https://mathcs.clarku.edu/huxley/CE8/B-Ab.html. Later published in Collected Essays, Vol. 8, p. 229.

Arthur_Koestler

Progress of Science

“The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life.”
  • Source: Arthur Koestler, In The Ghost in the Machine (1967).

Kenneth_W_Kolence

Large Systems

“The basic problem is that certain classes of systems are placing demands on us which are beyond our capabilities and our theories and methods of design and production at this time ... It is large systems that are encountering great difficulties. We should not expect the production of such systems to be easy.”

Lawrence_M_Krauss

Biggest Misconception

“The biggest misconception about science is that it tells us what's true. It doesn't do that at all. It tells us what's false. And by knowing what's false, it's like Sherlock Holmes, you get rid of what's false and you hope what's left is closer to the truth. But you never know that any theory is absolutely true, and the only way to find out to make progress is to be able to rule things out. So falsifiability is very important.”
  • Source: Panel comments by Lawrence Krauss at Perimeter Institute's festival "Quantum to Cosmos: Ideas for the Future" in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, October 2009. Available online as Youtube video "Lawrence Krauss, Sean Carroll, Neil Turok & Others - Quantum to Cosmos" at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ftH1yig-HDU (accessed 2017) at about 27 minutes into the video.

Robert_Lawrence_Kuhn

Scientific Method

“I like to distinguish between the scientific method, which is applied to all materialistic theories. The scientific method is one of observation or experimentation, repeatability, falsification, the repeatability by different techniques of different labs, or prediction and results. It's a scientific method. I say that if it's a non-physical theory, or the theory has any aspect of non-physicalism to it, it doesn't have to be all, any aspect invalidates, to some degree invalidates, the scientific method as I just described from being applicable. And I think there's a tendency in some theories that have some non-physical aspect to try to show their legitimacy by applying the scientific method... I think that's a false desire, because once you're non-physical you are invalidating, to one degree or another, the scientific method. Maybe not totally, but in some degree.”
  • Source: Kuhn, Robert Lawrence. Within the YouTube video “All 325+ Competing Consciousness Theories In One Video” on the Essentia Foundation channel, https://youtu.be/h5G6Oc_V3Lw?si=jzabxeu55GvABDFs, published 2025-08-22, video offset at 1:32:25.

Scientific Method Limits

“Every theory that is dualist, panpsychist or idealist agrees that we can study the biological facets of consciousness by studying the brain – but they all claim this will never lead to a complete understanding. In other words, there are limits to how far the scientific method can take us.”

Pierre-Simon_Laplace

System of Nature

“The present state of the system of nature is evidently a consequence of what it was in the preceding moment, and if we conceive of an intelligence that at a given instant comprehends all the relations of the entities of this universe, it could state the respective position, motions, and general affects of all these entities at any time in the past or future. Physical astronomy, the branch of knowledge that does the greatest honor to the human mind, gives us an idea, albeit imperfect, of what such an intelligence would be. The simplicity of the law by which the celestial bodies move, and the relations of their masses and distances, permit analysis to follow their motions up to a certain point; and in order to determine the state of the system of these great bodies in past or future centuries, it suffices for the mathematician that their position and their velocity be given by observation for any moment in time. Man owes that advantage to the power of the instrument he employs, and to the small number of relations that it embraces in its calculations. But ignorance of the different causes involved in the production of events, as well as their complexity, taken together with the imperfection of analysis, prevents our reaching the same certainty about the vast majority of phenomena. Thus there are things that are uncertain for us, things more or less probable, and we seek to compensate for the impossibility of knowing them by determining their different degrees of likelihood. So it was that we owe to the weakness of the human mind one of the most delicate and ingenious of mathematical theories, the science of chance or probability.”
  • Source: Pierre-Simon Laplace, 'Recherches, 1º, sur l'Intégration des Équations Différentielles aux Différences Finies, et sur leur Usage dans la Théorie des Hasards' (1773, published 1776). In Oeuvres complètes de Laplace, 14 Vols. (1843-1912), Vol. 8, 144-5, trans. Charles Coulston Gillispie, Pierre-Simon Laplace 1749-1827: A Life in Exact Science (1997), 26.

Thomas_Robert_Malthus

Theory and Experiments

“It is an acknowledged truth in philosophy, that a just theory will always be confirmed by experiment.”

N_David_Mermin

Shut Up and Calculate

“I'm one of the uncomfortable ones. If I were forced to sum up in one sentence what the Copenhagen interpretation says to me, it would be 'Shut up and calculate!' But I won't shut up. I would rather celebrate the strangeness of quantum theory than deny it, because I believe it still has interesting things to teach us about how certain powerful but flawed verbal and mental tools we once took for granted continue to infect our thinking in subtly hidden ways.”
  • Source: What's Wrong with this Pillow? by N. David Mermin, Cornell University, Physics Today, volume 42, issure 4, April 1989, page 9, doi:10.1063/1.2810963

John_von_Neumann

Gradual Development of Theory

“What is important is the gradual development of a theory, based on a careful analysis of the ... facts. ... Its first applications are necessarily to elementary problems where the result has never been in doubt and no theory is actually required. At this early stage the application serves to corroborate the theory. The next stage develops when the theory is applied to somewhat more complicated situations in which it may already lead to a certain extent beyond the obvious and familiar. Here theory and application corroborate each other mutually. Beyond lies the field of real success: genuine prediction by theory. It is well known that all mathematized sciences have gone through these successive stages of evolution.”
  • Source: John von Neumann, 'Formulation of the Economic Problem' in Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1964), 8. Reprinted in John Von Neumann, F. Bródy (ed.) and Tibor Vámos (ed.), The Neumann Compendium (2000), 416.

David_E_Nye

Rugged Engineer

“Well before World War I, the engineer emerged as a rugged individualist, the man of action (the profession was overwhelmingly male) who overcame obstacles, put theories into practice, and ensured material progress.”
  • Source: A book. Written by David E. Nye. Entitled 'Narratives and Spaces'. Published in 1997 by Univerity of Exeter Press, Exeter, UK. Hardback ISBN 0-85989-555-6. Paperback ISBN 0-85989-556-4. Chapter 5, page 81.

Joel_Pel

Murphy's Law Equation

“A new mathematical foundation to one of today’s most recognized physical laws, Murphy’s Law. Experimental data matches very nicely with the theory presented in this equation.”
MurphysEquation.gif
  • Notes:
    • PM is the Murphy’s probability that something will go wrong.
    • KM is Murphy’s constant (equal to one).
    • FM is Murphy’s factor, a very small number that can only be calculated on a 386-computer running Windows 3.1. Here we will approximate it by FM ≈ 0.01.
    • I is the importance of the result or outcome of the event on a scale of 1 to 10.
    • C is the complexity of the system on a scale of 1 to 10.
    • U is the urgency on a scale of 1 to 10.
    • F is the frequency on a scale of 1 to 10.
    • e is Euler's number, a mathematical constant approximately equal to 2.71828.
  • Source: Written by Joel Pel in the article “The Murphy's Law Equation” published 2007-05-21 in The Science Creative Quarterly.

Alan_Perlis

Neuroscience, Psychology, and Software

“The only constructive theory connecting neuroscience and psychology will arise from the study of software.”

Steven_Pinker

Neurons to Consciousness

“None of us has a brain that can actually put us in touch with reality unaided with truth. I've just shown you a bunch of gadgetry that responds to things that are essential to our survival, things that prevent us from falling off cliffs and bumping into trees. But they don't actually correspond to any clear description of the world as it is. So we have, for example, circuitry that responds to the edges rather than the physical distribution of light, because edges are important, that's where objects leave off and their backgrounds begin. Moreover, they can be fooled, as I did with each one of you. That since our neural circuitry does consist of a mechanism, not a pipeline to the truth or a window onto objective reality. That is naïve realism we know is false because there are illusions. You can't just trust your senses. That means we need some way of augmenting the faculties that nature gave us to make our beliefs as accurate as possible. Which of course is why the early modern philosophers made such a big deal of visual illusions. They said you can't just open your eyes and see the world as it is. Look at all these illusions. So what we do, what gives some of us confidence that our beliefs are objectively true is that they are part of an institutional infrastructure of testing and criticism and logic and determining which hypotheses withstand criticism and attempts at refutation. Devising exotic arrangements of reality to reflect the way reality is put together, namely experiments. Thanks to this huge network of minds, each one of them making up for deficits of all the others, we like to think that we have a collective grasp on truth that none of us individually can have. But of course, it's always fallible. The religious beliefs I think were actually pretty reasonable hypotheses in earlier states of our collective knowledge. Even Richard Dawkins said that before Darwin he probably would have been a creationist because the cosmic engineer was the only available explanation for the obvious adaptive complexity of living things. I would add that prior to the advent of modern neuroscience I probably would have believed in souls because there was no better explanation for phenomena such as that people respond intelligently to their environments. When you dream some part of you is up and about the world while your body is in bed the whole time. That seems like there must be some part of you that can leave your body. When a person suddenly dies some kind of animating force no longer seems to be animating the body that was there just a few minutes ago. So the soul hypothesis is not a stupid or irrational belief, nor is creationism if it's the best that you have. Now, of course, we can do better. But doing better in part depends not just on this cumulative weight of evidence and argument. But because few of us can actually reconstruct the scientific observations that justify the theory of natural selection or the theory of neural networks, all of us, at least a little bit, take it on faith in the following sense; that there is a community that you trust enough because when they have been challenged to defend their beliefs they can connect them to reality. They have shown that it isn't magic. That they have given reason to trust them because they've convinced you that they're the mores of their culture, of their scientific culture, designed so that they will find true things and weed out false things. If you don't have a degree of solidarity or trust, if you think that scientists are all in cahoots with big corporations or are trying to tear down all faith and values and meaning and you simply refuse to follow through the very long chain of deduction that connects the claims to the experiments, then you'll naturally reject it just because it's not your tribe. For you and me scientists are our tribe and we're apt to give them some credibility, indeed some credulousness, knowing that if ever challenged it would be repaid. But unless you trace that through it can be all too easy to reject the conclusions of science, and indeed a number of studies have shown that contrary to the common belief that people believe in falsehoods, such as that vaccines cause autism or that humans were created five thousand years ago or that the burning of fossil fuels has no effect on global temperatures, it turns out that people with those beliefs that we have every reason to believe are false are no more scientifically naïve on average than people that have beliefs that are scientifically justified. You give a test on evolution to a bunch of people who believe in evolution, give it to a bunch of creationists, there's not much difference in how well they score. In fact, often they are equal. Likewise, the typical grasp of climate science among someone who signs on to the scientific consensus is not much better than the adamant deniers. That kind of dashes the hope that simply by increasing the quality of science education you will lead people to more accurate beliefs. There, in addition, has to be a dissociation of who you think are the good guys and who are the bad guys from who has the best claims to truth. That's what it depends on.”

Keywords: Accuracy_quotes Adament_quotes Adaptability_quotes Addition_quotes Advent_quotes Aid_quotes Animate_quotes Argue_quotes Arrangement_quotes Attempt_quotes Augment_quotes Autism_quotes Availability_quotes Background_quotes Bad_quotes Bed_quotes Belief_quotes Best_quotes Big_quotes Body_quotes Brain_quotes Bump_quotes Bunch_quotes Burn_quotes Cahoot_quotes Chain_quotes Challenge_quotes Circuit_quotes Claim_quotes Clear_quotes Cliff_quotes Climate_quotes Collective_quotes Complexity_quotes Common_quotes Community_quotes Conclusion_quotes Confidence_quotes Connection_quotes Consensus_quotes Consist_quotes Contrary_quotes Convince_quotes Cooperation_quotes Corporation_quotes Correspondence_quotes Cosmic_quotes Creationism_quotes Credibility_quotes Criticism_quotes Culture_quotes Cumulative_quotes Dash_quotes Deal_quotes Death_quotes Deception_quotes Deduction_quotes Defence_quotes Deficit_quotes Degree_quotes Deny_quotes Dependence_quotes Description_quotes Design_quotes Determine_quotes Devise_quotes Differences_quotes Dissociation_quotes Distribution_quotes Dreaming_quotes Early_quotes Easy_quotes Edge_quotes Education_quotes Effect_quotes Engineer_quotes Environment_quotes Essential_quotes Evidence_quotes Evolution_quotes Exotic_quotes Experiment_quotes Explanation_quotes Eye_quotes Faculty_quotes Faith_quotes Fall_quotes Fallible_quotes False_quotes Few_quotes Find_quotes Follow_quotes Fool_quotes Force_quotes Fossil_quotes Fuel_quotes Gadget_quotes Global_quotes Good_quotes Grasp_quotes Guy_quotes Huge_quotes Hypothesis_quotes Illusion_quotes Importance_quotes Increasing_quotes Individual_quotes Infrastructure_quotes Institution_quotes Intelligence_quotes Irrational_quotes Justification_quotes Knowledge_quotes Leave_quotes Life_quotes Light_quotes Logic_quotes Long_quotes Magic_quotes Meaning_quotes Mechanism_quotes Mind_quotes Modern_quotes Moral_quotes Naïve_quotes Nature_quotes Natural_Selection_quotes Network_quotes Neural_quotes Neuroscience_quotes Object_quotes Objectivity_quotes Observation_quotes Obvious_quotes Part_quotes People_quotes Perception_quotes Phenomena_quotes Philosophy_quotes Physical_quotes Pipeline_quotes Possibility_quotes Prehistoric_quotes Prevent_quotes Reality_quotes Reason_quotes Reconstruct_quotes Reflection_quotes Refuse_quotes Refutation_quotes Rejection_quotes Religion_quotes Repay_quotes Respond_quotes Science_quotes Scientist_quotes Score_quotes Seem_quotes Selection_quotes Sense_quotes Show_quotes Sight_quotes Solidarity_quotes Soul_quotes State_quotes Study_quotes Stupidity_quotes Survival_quotes Tear_quotes Temperature_quotes Testing_quotes Theory_quotes Thinking_quotes Time_quotes Touch_quotes Trace_quotes Tree_quotes Tribal_quotes Trust_quotes Truth_quotes Try_quotes Typical_quotes Unaided_quotes Vaccine_quotes Value_quotes Visual_quotes Weed_quotes Weight_quotes Whole_quotes Window_quotes Withstand_quotes World_quotes

Computational Theory of Mind

“The computational theory of mind is not the same thing as the despised ‘computer metaphor.’ As many critics have pointed out, computers are serial, doing one thing at a time; brains are parallel, doing millions of things at once. Computers are fast; brains are slow. Computer parts are reliable; brain parts are noisy. Computers have a limited number of connections; brains have trillions. Computers are assembled according to a blueprint; brains must assemble themselves.”
  • Source: Steven Pinker (1997). How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-06973-0; eISBN 978-0-393-06973-0. Chapter 1 Section Reverse-Engineering the Psyche.

Mind and Soul

“The traditional explanation of intelligence is that human flesh is suffused with a non-material entity, the soul, usually envisioned as some kind of ghost or spirit. But the theory faces an insurmountable problem: How does the spook interact with solid matter? How does an ethereal nothing respond to flashes, pokes, and beeps and get arms and legs to move? Another problem is the overwhelming evidence that the mind is the activity of the brain.”
  • Source: Steven Pinker (1997). How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-06973-0; eISBN 978-0-393-06973-0. Chapter 2 The search for Intelligent Life in the Universe.

Computational Mind Probabilistic

“The computational theory thus embraces an alternative kind of computer with many elements that are active to a degree corresponding to the probability that some statement is true or false, and in which the activity levels change smoothly to register new and roughly accurate probabilities. (As we shall see, that may be the way the brain works.) The key idea is that the answer to the question 'What makes a system smart?' is not the kind of stuff it is made of or the kind of energy flowing through it, but what the parts of the machine stand for and how the patterns of changes inside it are designed to mirror truth-preserving relationships (including probabilistic and fuzzy truths).”
  • Source: Steven Pinker (1997). How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-06973-0; eISBN 978-0-393-06973-0. Chapter 2 Section: The search for Intelligent Life in the Universe.

Stipulation

“But the last dollop in the theory — that it subjectively feels like something to be such circuitry — may have to be stipulated as a fact about reality where explanation stops.”
  • Source: Steven Pinker in the book Enlightenment Now. Published in 2018 by Penguin Random House, New York, NY. ISBN:978-0525559023. Chapter 23.
  • Notes: Part of the Stipulation Problem of Consciousness.

Karl_Popper

Confirmation Easy

“It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory — if we look for confirmations. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions... A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or refute it.”
  • Source: Karl Raimund Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (1963), 36.

Theory Personality

“Understanding a theory has, indeed, much in common with understanding a human personality. We may know or understand a man's system of dispositions pretty well; that is to say, we may be able to predict how he would act in a number of different situations. But since there are infinitely many possible situations, of infinite variety, a full understanding of a man's dispositions does not seem to be possible.”
  • Source: Karl Raimund Popper, Objective Knowledge: an Evolutionary Approach (1972), 299.

Method of Science

“The method of science depends on our attempts to describe the world with simple theories: theories that are complex may become untestable, even if they happen to be true. Science may be described as the art of systematic over-simplification — the art of discerning what we may with advantage omit.”
  • Source: Karl Raimund Popper, Karl Raimund Popper and William Warren Bartley (ed.), The Open Universe: an Argument for Indeterminism (1991), 44. by Karl Raimund Popper, William Warren Bartley - Science - 1991

Considerations

“These considerations led me in the winter of 1919-20 to conclusions which I may now reformulate as follows.
1. Confirmation is easy.
2. Only risky predictions should count.
3. A good theory is a prohibition.
4. A theory which is not refutable is not scientific.
5. A genuine test is an attempt to falsify a theory.
6. Confirming evidence should not count unless it attempted to falsify.
7. Some genuine testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers.”

No Conclusive Disproof

“No conclusive disproof of a theory can ever be produced; for it is always possible to say that the experimental results are not reliable.”
  • Source: Popper, K. R. (2005). The Logic of Scientific Discovery | 1935 (1935/Epub ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Chap. 2

Epistemology

“In accordance with my proposal made above, epistemology, or the logic of scientific discovery, should be identified with the theory of scientific method. The theory of method, in so far as it goes beyond the purely logical analysis of the relations between scientific statements, is concerned with the choice of methods — with decisions about the way in which scientific statements are to be dealt with. These decisions will of course depend in their turn upon the aim which we choose from among a number of possible aims. The decision here proposed for laying down suitable rules for what I call the ‘empirical method’ is closely connected with my criterion of demarcation: I propose to adopt such rules as will ensure the testability of scientific statements; which is to say, their falsifiability.”
  • Source: Chapter 2. Popper, K. R. (2005). The Logic of Scientific Discovery | 1935 (1935/Epub ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Rittel_and_Webber

Planning Problems are Wicked Problems

“A great many barriers keep us from perfecting such a planning/governing system. Theory is inadequate for decent forecasting, our intelligence is insufficient to our tasks, plurality of objectives held by pluralities of politics makes it impossible to pursue unitary aims, and so on. The difficulties attached to rationality are tenacious, and we have so far been unable to get untangled from their web. This is partly because the classical paradigm of science and engineering - the paradigm that has underlain modern professionalism - is not applicable to the problems of open societal systems.”

Bertrand_Russell

Rational Man

“Thus the rational man, who attaches to each proposition the right degree of credibility, will be guided by the mathematical theory of probability when it is applicable.”
  • Source: Russell, B. (1948). Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Part V Chap. 6.

Exact Theory Beyond Human Powers

“A wholly exact theory is utterly beyond human powers. Although this may seem a paradox, all exact science is dominated by the idea of approximation. When a man tells you that he knows the exact truth about anything, you are safe in inferring that he is an inexact man.”

Erwin_Schrödinger

Quantum Discreteness

“The great revelation of quantum theory was that features of discreteness were discovered in the Book of Nature.”
  • Source: Erwin Schrödinger in the book “What is Life?”, chapter 4. Contained within the anthology “What is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell with Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches”. Published in 1992 and reprinted in 2013 by Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. ISBN: 9781107604667. Online at <http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/schrodinger-what-is-life-mind-matter-auto-sketches.pdf> retrieved 2024. Note: “What is Life?” originally published separately in 1944.

Observation and Theory

“Scientific theories serve to facilitate the survey of our observations and experimental findings... This procedure, while very useful for our remembering the facts in a well-ordered pattern, tends to obliterate the distinction between the actual observations and the theory arisen from them. And since the former always are of some sensual quality, theories are easily thought to account for sensual qualities; which, of course, they never do.”
  • Source: Erwin Schrödinger in the book “Mind and Matter”, chapter 6. Contained within the anthology “What is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell with Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches”. Published in 1992 and reprinted in 2013 by Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. ISBN: 9781107604667. Online at <http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/schrodinger-what-is-life-mind-matter-auto-sketches.pdf> retrieved 2024. Note: “Mind and Matter” originally published separately in 1944.

Rupert_Sheldrake

Multiverse

“This multiverse theory is the ultimate violation of Occam’s Razor, the philosophical principle that ‘entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity,' or in other words, that we should make as few assumptions as possible. It also has the major disadvantage of being untestable. And it does not even succeed in getting rid of God. An infinite God could be the God of an infinite number of universes.”
  • Source: Rupert Sheldrake. The book “Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery”, Introduction, page 12. Published in 2012 by Crown Publishing, New York, NY. Kindle Edition. ISBN: 978-0-7704-3671-1.

Evolutionary Randomness

“In neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory randomness plays a central role through the chance mutations of genes, which are quantum events. With different chance events, evolution would happen differently.”
  • Source: Rupert Sheldrake. The book “Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery”, Prologue, page 15. Published in 2012 by Crown Publishing, New York, NY. Kindle Edition. ISBN: 978-0-7704-3671-1.

Herbert_Simon

Invisible Hand

“In examining the processes of social coordination, economics has given top billing sometimes almost exclusive billing to the market mechanism. It is indeed a remarkable mechanism... The optimality theorems stretch credibility, so far as real-world markets are concerned, because they require substantive rationality of the kinds we found implausible in our examination of the theory of the firm. Markets populated by consumers and producers who satisfice instead of optimizing do not meet the conditions on which the theorems rest.”

Game Theory

“Game theory's most valuable contribution has been to show that rationality is effectively undefinable when competitive actors have unlimited computational capabilities for outguessing each other, but that the problem does not arise as acutely in a world, like the real world, of bounded rationality.”

Anthony_Standen

True Conclusions

“But although in theory physicists realize that their conclusions are ...not certainly true, this ... does not really sink into their consciousness. Nearly all the time ...they ... act as if Science were indisputably True, and what's more, as if only science were true ...Any information obtained otherwise than by the scientific method, although it may be true, the scientists will call 'unscientific,' using this word as a smear word, by bringing in the connotation from its original [Greek] meaning, to imply that the information is false, or at any rate slightly phony.”
  • Source: Anthony Standen, In Science is a Sacred Cow (1950), 176-77.

Alfred_Russel_Wallace

Truth Proof

“There is no more convincing proof of the truth of a comprehensive theory than its power of absorbing and finding a place for new facts, and its capability of interpreting phenomena which had been previously looked upon as unaccountable anomalies. It is thus that the law of universal gravitation and the undulatory theory of light have become established and universally accepted by men of science. Fact after fact has been brought forward as being apparently inconsistent with them, and one after another these very facts have been shown to be the consequences of the laws they were at first supposed to disprove. A false theory will never stand this test. Advancing knowledge brings to light whole groups of facts which it cannot deal with, and its advocates steadily decrease in numbers, notwithstanding the ability and scientific skill with which it may have been supported.”
  • Source: Alfred Russel Wallace, From a review of four books on the subject 'Mimicry, and Other Protective Resemblances Among Animals', in The Westminster Review (Jul 1867), 88, 1. Wallace is identified as the author within the article as reprinted in William Beebe, The Book of Naturalists: An Anthology of the Best Natural History (1988), 108.

William_Whewell

Mask of Theory

“There is a mask of theory over the whole face of nature, if it be theory to infer more than we see.”

Eugene_Wigner

No Definite Evidence

“[F. Werner, while a student in Princeton,] came to me and expressed his bewilderment with the fact that we make a rather narrow selection when choosing the data on which we test our theories. ‘How do we know that, if we made a theory which focuses its attention on phenomena we disregard and disregards some of the phenomena now commanding our attention, that we could not build another theory which has little in common with the present one but which, nevertheless, explains just as many phenomena as the present theory?' It has to be admitted that we have no definite evidence that there is no such theory.”
  • Source: Eugene Paul Wigner, In 'The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,' Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics (Feb 1960), 13, No. 1 (February 1960). Collected in Eugene Paul Wigner, A.S. Wightman (ed.), Jagdish Mehra (ed.), The Collected Works of Eugene Paul Wigner (1955), Vol. 6, 535.