Unnecessary Advice Age
What happened to our dear theorisation model lately?
It does seem like a not important matter, right? Well it isn’t and here is why:
People are creating Instagram accounts, Twitter pages, Youtube channels to give people a couple of advice, based on what?
Many of them literally didn’t do anything on their profession, or had has nothing do about the matter which they’re talking about, but learn from other’s experience.
And people are listening to them, reading their blogs, sharing their posts which they think it’s worth to look at. But if you do love researching, when you dig a bit, you generally find a thing called resource a freaking “experience”. What does that mean?
Experience in general means simply data from experiment, it’s like a conclusion section of a scientific paper. But the experience they’re referring is basically “I’ve done this and it works”, “he did that, now he’s a millionaire”, thus this you find the result of your research which has ended up you finding inductive assumings.
Is this the way of our learning system does work? Or is there anything more which we still didn’t talk about?
Let’s talk about the way of learning of science. If a scientist would be curious about something, then he starts with an assuming process, which is directly “I think that this works that way.” A simple sentence which is going to lead the scientists to learn the matter. So the theorisation started.
After this process, he starts reading the literature on the matter, and configure the experiment. Thus he convert his first sentence “I think that this works that way” into “this works that way, unless it starts not working”, so he starts seeking for a field which is going to falsify his theory.
Why does he do that? I mean he already had information, right? Because if his theory doesn’t let to get any new information, it will eventually has a dead end, so it will give him new information no longer.
So, he starts falsify it by experiment, because he is curious about the matter, and wants to expand his knowledge. He is able to do that as long as his theory leads to find new informations.
And eventually by the time being by his studies via experiments and readings, he’s going to find out why his first thought didn’t work out, so after that what’s he going to do? Will he be in the sulks?
No, he will be glad that why it didn’t work out, thus now, he is able to create a new theory. His knowledge expanded by this falsification, therefore he can create a new theory which will include the old theory with new information.
And process starts being a road which has no limitation as long as his car capacity to handle the distance. But if he’d think his first sight of the matter was correct and he’d start confirming it, he’d end up staring his theory’s impeccable form which does not provide any new knowledge.
So by far, you may think how does these two subject connected to each other?
There are two types of experience I have mentioned above, and we found the results different to each other by following different paths; one did expand its capacity of providing knowledge, and the other one is looking its perfection in the mirror by confirming his handsomeness.
In the beginning I have explained their source of information isn’t accurate, because they are based on other’s experience and not valid everywhere. It’s like saying “sun risen up 1000 years, therefore it’s going to rise up tomorrow.” ,if the cosmos would be stabilised it could, but it is not, so it doesn’t mean that sun risen up 1000 years, will rise up tomorrow. After 5 million years it will blow up, and your assuming won’t be valid after 1 day before 5 million years.
So, in addition to these I have mentioned above, I have explained the false verses of the inductive assuming. Ergo as the conclusion we should not take any advice from these people who do advice something based on this kind of experience.
Simply, do not listen to Uncle Harry.