Are all models wrong?

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
uwot
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by uwot » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:41 am

Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:39 pm
Literally NOBODY says "I know my wife".
Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:27 pm
Go to Google. Type "I know my wife". Not a single fucking person on Earth has used that exact phrase.

You are the first one.
Seeming as my incomprehension is perfectly justifiable...
This sentence probably won't turn up much on a Google search. How many results does a string of words need before you can comprehend it?

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:50 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:10 am
Lacewing

Btw, assuming you're one of aka Skepdick's many personae - probably better to disguise your stylistic quirks, such as block capitalisation for emphasis.
ROFL

Talk about poor judgment.

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:51 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:41 am
This sentence probably won't turn up much on a Google search.
Not probably. Definitely.
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:41 am
How many results does a string of words need before you can comprehend it?
One example of actual, contextual real-world usage would probably suffice.

You seem to be of the conviction that you 'comprehend' the sentence 'I know my wife' in a vacuum. That I doubt.

Here is a tought experiment. You and Peter bump into each other on the street. The first thing he says to you is "I know my wife".
Since the sentence contains no new, interesting or relevant information, what is it that you 'comprehend' about that sentence exactly?

Peter Holmes
Posts: 1102
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Peter Holmes » Tue Jan 14, 2020 2:08 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:50 pm
Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:10 am
Lacewing

Btw, assuming you're one of aka Skepdick's many personae - probably better to disguise your stylistic quirks, such as block capitalisation for emphasis.
ROFL

Talk about poor judgment.
I suppose being a wanker comes naturally if you're a p****.

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 2:14 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 2:08 pm
I suppose being a wanker comes naturally if you're a p****.
Peter, you are being a dismissive wanker to Lancewing just because she uses caps for emphasis.

You are being a p**** to her, because I am a p**** to you.

I'll get you a mirror for those mis-directed emotions...

uwot
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by uwot » Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:52 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:51 pm
Here is a tought experiment. You and Peter bump into each other on the street. The first thing he says to you is "I know my wife".
Since the sentence contains no new, interesting or relevant information, what is it that you 'comprehend' about that sentence exactly?
That Peter Holmes knows his wife. Anyway, back to the topic, I don't believe that because all models are underdetermined they are all therefore wrong. I'm fairly confident that the heliocentric model of the solar system, allowing for gravity induced wobbles, is pretty much on the money, for instance.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3952
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:08 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:10 am
Lacewing

Btw, assuming you're one of aka Skepdick's many personae - probably better to disguise your stylistic quirks, such as block capitalisation for emphasis.
Wow. Because I used CAPS for emphasis, you think I'm Skepdick? (What does that name even mean, anyway?)

So you have nothing thoughtful to respond to my thoughtful response to you? I guess you didn't like it. :lol:

Ah well... carry on fighting with Skepdick (whatever that is).

Peter Holmes
Posts: 1102
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Peter Holmes » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:16 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:08 pm
Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:10 am
Lacewing

Btw, assuming you're one of aka Skepdick's many personae - probably better to disguise your stylistic quirks, such as block capitalisation for emphasis.
Wow. Because I used CAPS for emphasis, you think I'm Skepdick? (What does that name even mean, anyway?)

So you have nothing thoughtful to respond to my thoughtful response to you? I guess you didn't like it. :lol:

Ah well... carry on fighting with Skepdick (whatever that is).
All out of thoughtful responses, atm.

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:18 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:52 pm
That Peter Holmes knows his wife.
You are saying the same nothing he's saying.

Paraphrase your 'comprehension'.

Based on the above sentence would you assume that Peter knows his wife's Grandmother's birthday?

uwot
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by uwot » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:30 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:18 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:52 pm
That Peter Holmes knows his wife.
You are saying the same nothing he's saying.
Makes sense to me.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:18 pm
Paraphrase your 'comprehension'.
Frankly, I'd be surprised if Peter Holmes doesn't know his wife.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:18 pm
Based on the above sentence would you assume that Peter knows his wife's Grandmother's birthday?
No. Is it your belief that knowing someone entails knowing the birthday of all their ancestors?

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:44 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:30 pm
Frankly, I'd be surprised if Peter Holmes doesn't know his wife.
Which is precisely why it's a surprising sentence. It says nothing that needs saying. Which is why nobody (according to Google) says it.

Hence Peter saying it is the exception, not the norm.
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:30 pm
No. Is it your belief that knowing someone entails knowing the birthday of all their ancestors?
No, but is my belief that knowing the birthday of any of your wife's ancestors counts as knowledge about your wife.

Is it your belief that knowing somebody entails knowing anything about them?

uwot
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by uwot » Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:44 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:30 pm
Frankly, I'd be surprised if Peter Holmes doesn't know his wife.
Which is precisely why it's a surprising sentence. It says nothing that needs saying.
So if it's that bleedin' obvious, why this?
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:51 pm
You seem to be of the conviction that you 'comprehend' the sentence 'I know my wife' in a vacuum. That I doubt.
Are you using incomprehensible as a synonym for surprising?
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:44 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:30 pm
No. Is it your belief that knowing someone entails knowing the birthday of all their ancestors?
No, but is my belief that knowing the birthday of any of your wife's ancestors counts as knowledge about your wife.
There's either an 'it' or a question mark missing. We all make typos, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll go with the former. I don't know the birthday of any of my own grandparents, and I never even met any of my wife's grandparents, but having lived together for 20 years, I really don't think my knowledge is seriously lacking because of that.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:44 pm
Is it your belief that knowing somebody entails knowing anything about them?
Yes, but not every historical detail.

Skepdick
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm

uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
So if it's that bleedin' obvious, why this?
It says nothing that needs saying. Which is why nobody ever (according to Google) says it.

Hence Peter saying it is the exception, not the norm.

It's neither obvious what Peter is saying, nor why he's saying it.
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
Are you using incomprehensible as a synonym for surprising?
No. I am using it as a synonym for 'uninformative'. Because it lacks content - there is nothing to 'comprehend'.

The uninformative sentence uniquely uttered by Peter is surprising to me.
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
I don't know the birthday of any of my own grandparents, and I never even met any of my wife's grandparents, but having lived together for 20 years, I really don't think my knowledge is seriously lacking because of that.
Great! So I can infer that (to you) knowing a person's birthday (in general) is not necessary for knowing the person.

uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
Yes, but not every historical detail.
Which is why I used the word 'anything' (rather than 'everything') - I am trying to establish your lowest viable sufficiency criterion for 'knowing' a person.

So lets go into the other extreme: Is knowing somebody's name sufficient to say that you know them?

I know your name, I know you have a daughter who goes to Edinburgh University, I know you attained a Masters degree in 2016, I know you have lived with your wife for 20 years. I certainly know more about you than I know about the guy who made me coffee this morning (I definitely don't know him).

Would you say that I know you?

uwot
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by uwot » Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:55 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
So if it's that bleedin' obvious, why this?
It says nothing that needs saying. Which is why nobody ever (according to Google) says it.

Hence Peter saying it is the exception, not the norm.

It's neither obvious what Peter is saying, nor why he's saying it.
I disagree. What and why seem perfectly obvious in the context he said it:
Peter Holmes wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:40 am
I know my kitchen, clothes, wife and children, home town, colleagues, guitars, and so on and so on. These are real things that I know.
It is difficult to believe that you cannot work out the "intent/purpose/telos" from that. And as he pointed out:
Peter Holmes wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 3:51 pm
...we use the word know and its cognates perfectly clearly in many different contexts, and that if required we can explain what we mean in different ways.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
Are you using incomprehensible as a synonym for surprising?
No. I am using it as a synonym for 'uninformative'. Because it lacks content - there is nothing to 'comprehend'.
Frankly, I think it is disingenuous to claim that "incomprehensible" is a synonym for "nothing to 'comprehend'." I suppose it is possible that you spend so much time on computer languages that you sometimes forget that most are very poor models for natural languages.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
The uninformative sentence uniquely uttered by Peter is surprising to me.
You'll get over it. I used to be surprised by how fatuous some of your arguments are.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
uwot wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:17 pm
I don't know the birthday of any of my own grandparents, and I never even met any of my wife's grandparents, but having lived together for 20 years, I really don't think my knowledge is seriously lacking because of that.
Great! So I can infer that (to you) knowing a person's birthday (in general) is not necessary for knowing the person.
You can't infer that from my thinking that knowing a person's grandmother's birthday (in general) is not necessary for knowing the person.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
I am trying to establish your lowest viable sufficiency criterion for 'knowing' a person.
I'm with Peter Holmes on this one: it depends on the context.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
So lets go into the other extreme: Is knowing somebody's name sufficient to say that you know them?
Personally I wouldn't set the bar so low and I'm confident that Peter Holmes knows a bit more than just that about his wife.
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:46 pm
I know your name, I know you have a daughter who goes to Edinburgh University, I know you attained a Masters degree in 2016, I know you have lived with your wife for 20 years. I certainly know more about you than I know about the guy who made me coffee this morning (I definitely don't know him).

Would you say that I know you?
Thankfully not.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3952
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Are all models wrong?

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:45 pm

Peter Holmes wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:16 pm
All out of thoughtful responses, atm.
Ah. So, you make some inaccurate rude assumption to blow me off, and then don't apologize or say anything further. NICE.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest