From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo Thu Feb 20 15:20:53 EST 1992
Article 3743 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo
>From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: QM nonsense
Message-ID: <1992Feb14.180758.15294@psych.toronto.edu>
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <65812@netnews.upenn.edu> <413@tdatirv.UUCP> <66142@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 18:07:58 GMT

>In article <413@tdatirv.UUCP>, sarima@tdatirv (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>
>>How is it nonsense?
>
>>Especially if there is an actual experimental result to back it up?
>
And while I'm on the topic, a great way to show that a theory is false,
regardless of how much empirical support it has, is to show that the
theory is inconsisent, either with itself or with some other much better
confirmed hyposthesis. (Naive empiricism dies another ignominious death!)

-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
---------------------


