Is correspondence true (in CR)?

Showing only those parts of the discussion which lead to #2349.

See full discussion·See most recent related ideas
  Log in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.

Discussions can branch out indefinitely. Zoom out for the bird’s-eye view.
Erik Orrje’s avatar
Erik OrrjeOP, 3 days ago·#2320

CR is an evolutionary theory. There's no need for correspondence in Darwinism. Therefore, we don't need it in CR either.

Criticized1oustanding criticism
Benjamin Davies’s avatar
Benjamin Davies revised 3 days ago·#2322
Only version leading to #2349 (2 total)

I think correspondence is to epistemology as adaptation is to evolution. Knowledge that corresponds more to reality tends to be more useful (and/or has more reach), similar to biological adaptation.

Criticism of #2320
Erik Orrje’s avatar
Erik OrrjeOP revised 2 days ago·#2345
Only version leading to #2349 (3 total)

Memes and genes are the same type of knowledge. Since we can "let our theories die in our place", we can make faster iterations and expand the environment to which the idea is adapted (including potentially the whole universe). There's no need for correspondance, just more reach and adaptation across contexts.

Criticism of #2322Criticized1oustanding criticism
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis Hackethal, 2 days ago·#2349

Superseded by #2348. This comment was generated automatically.

Criticism of #2345