No, predictions are not overrated. On some scientists’ strange attitude toward philosophy
One of my favorite science writers is theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, who blogs at BackReaction. Her book on the sorry state of fundamental physics, Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray, is a must read for anyone interested in current philosophy of science.
Except that Sabine, apparently, doesn’t realize that she is doing philosophy of science. In fact, she is downright disdainful of philosophers. When I met her a few years ago in Munich, at a conference on the scientific status of string theory (proceedings here) I thought we very much were on the same side of things, but it turned out that she seriously misunderstood the point of my presentation, which was about what influential 20th century philosopher of science Karl Popper actually said, as distinct from what physicists who just read Popper’s Wikipedia page think he said.
Now she is at it again. In a strange post entitled “Predictions are overrated” she writes: “The world, it seems, is full with people who mistakenly think that a theory which makes correct predictions is a good theory. This is rubbish, of course, and it has led to a lot of unnecessary confusion. I blame this confusion on the many philosophers, notably Popper and Lakatos, who have gone on about the importance of predictions, but…
