Thread:User talk:Armondikov/Stargazing live, black holes and the scary ass CP/reply (5)

Most things probably aren't decided on reason, but it doesn't stop you putting methods in place to minimise that effect, which is the point. You generate a series of checks and balances, usually involving discussions with others, that ensures you're not just making stuff up. If it goes right, you hold beliefs that gel nicely with how the world works, if it goes wrong you don't but believe it's true anyway even more. I presume it's the latter that you object to, it probably is a big risk.

Relativity of wrong is a great concept, though. Seriously, when I get around to teaching undergraduates philosophy of science (a version of it aimed at actual lab-working scientists, not philosophers who think they understand how it works) that will certainly be included. There's too much "well it's certainly wrong because science is incomplete" and that just gives the wrong impression. To quote Tetronian: "We're all wrong, but I'd rather be *puts on sunglasses* less wrong."