Re: Kuhn

From: Damien Broderick (
Date: Sat Jun 24 2000 - 01:15:23 MDT

At 02:54 AM 24/06/00 EDT, you wrote:

>As for
>Trans-Realist, I am not sure what that is except as Rudy Rucker has said;
>a fantasy of one's life.

He's said a lot more than that. In brief, it's a strategy of writing
fiction that intensifies daily (quotidian, ordinary-ised) life by rendering
it into fantastic metaphor. My extended usage suggests thickening
sf/fantasy by replacing stock cardboard characters with something closer to
your own inward and conflicted experience of life.

>On another matter, your analysis of the future, The Last Mortal Generation,
>was good, but I want to see it expanded upon. I mean the material is so
>'scalable' that conceivably, you might have used a do it yourself timeline
>and sketched in the next 10,000 years or so.

My argument in THE SPIKE (a line of thought familiar here, especially as
argued by Eliezer) is that we can scarcely see past the next 50. I do
*try*, though - borrowing from Lem and Moravec etc as I go.

>I wonder what makes Kuhn so
>respected by science writers. Is it really true that something has to be
>falsifiable to be of use?

You're confusing Kuhn with Karl Popper.

I prefer the late Imre Lakatos (pronounced Lack-uh-tosh) to either - see my


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:14:12 MDT