Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,sci.psychology,sci.physics,sci.philosophy.meta,sci.bio,rec.arts.books,comp.ai.philosophy,alt.consciousness
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!swiss.ans.net!paperboy.amoco.com!apctrc!msc.edu!news.stolaf.edu!news
From: Scott Erb <erb@stolaf.edu>
Subject: Re: Why scientists popularize premature speculations? 
In-Reply-To: <3c3q75INN79c@ephor.tusc.com.au> 
X-Sender: erb@mari.acc.stolaf.edu
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.90.941207130052.4714A-100000@mari.acc.stolaf.edu>
Sender: news@news.stolaf.edu (Network News)
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN  USA
References: <3bd8s0$1q2@pobox.csc.fi> <3bh51v$t7s@agate.berkeley.edu> <3c3q75INN79c@ephor.tusc.com.au> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 13:08:35 -0600 (CST)
Lines: 25
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:97405 sci.psychology:31160 sci.physics:102676 sci.philosophy.meta:15384 sci.bio:23787 comp.ai.philosophy:23329



On 7 Dec 1994, Anthony Shipman wrote:

> What I would like to see in public discussion or reporting of scientific
> matters is a scale of certainty used.  For example a scale of 1 to 10 with
> 1 being a pure hypothesis through to 10 for a certainty (like the existence
> of atoms).  When the media reports some new discovery or breakthrough 
> the certainty measure should be reported along with it.  The value can be
> determined using a Delphic method.

Yikes, you're treading on extremely spoungy ground with this suggestion.

How do you define certainty?
What standards exist as to levels of "probable certainty"?

I think it would be better to simply show that disagreement and 
alternative ideas either exist to a large extent or don't.  Otherwise, 
depending on how this "standard" is developed, the scale could be extremely 
misleading.  (It could be biased towards things testable with existing 
methods, towards existing 'conventional wisdoms,' against creative and 
unconventional ideas, etc.)  In principle, trying to place a number on a 
claim and relate it to a scale of certainty seems just as prone to abuse 
as is the use of "slippery language."
 -Scott
