Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctordick
Valid information is defined to be the actual information to be explained
|
are not these valid info what we called as self-evident?
Quote:
|
and hypothesized information is an essential part of the explanation. That is to say, hypothesized information must be true if the explanation is to be valid; however, if the explanation is removed (discounted or disproved) the hypothesized information may also be removed.
|
so hypo info that is based in a valid info is also a worldview?
Quote:
|
Valid information, on the other hand, being the actual information to be explained can not ever be removed: each and every explanation must explain that information.
|
how do know that a established valid info is always valid.
Quote:
|
I will suggest that what an explanation does for information is that it provides expectations of subsets of that information. That is, it seems to me that if all the information is known, then any questions about the information can be answered (in fact, that could be regarded as the definition of "knowing"). On the other hand, if the information is understood (explainable), then questions about the information can be answered given only limited or incomplete knowledge of the underlying information: i.e., limited subsets of the information. What I am saying is that understanding implies it is possible to predict expectations for information not known; the explanation constitutes a method which provides one with those rational expectations for unknown information consistent with what is known.
|
Quote:
|
Does anyone have a suggestion for clarifying what I said twenty years ago: i.e., anything I have omitted that you think should be there?
|
isn't this , what we called theory?
