Lawrence Krauss, a professor of physics at Case Western Reserve University, has an article in the Dec. 3 2005 issue of New Scientist (http://www.newscientist.com/) called “Mind your language”. In it he says “A scientific theory is a logically coherent and predictive system that has been tested against experiment or observation”. Thus, since the string “enterprise” has not produced predictions that can be verified by experimentation, it is not a theory. This definition of “Theory” gets around the complaint of Intelligent Design folks who say that evolution is just a theory implying that it has not been verified. Of course it has been verified. Krauss’s definition of the word “Theory” includes verification and could only be used with ideas that have been substantiated by experimentation. Thus, the string “enterprise” or intelligent design “enterprise” would not be theories. This is not common usage and is confusing. It seems to me that using the phrases proven or substantiated theory would be a better means of indicating verification than just the word by itself. To most people the word theory does connote something that is conjecture. It may be a conjecture that has been substantiated through experimentation, has been refuted through experimentation or not rigorously evaluated. Come to think of it, it seems to me that the word conjecture would be best for unproven theories. Conjecture seems to emphasize the lack of proof or substantiation. Perhaps we should have conjectures and proven conjectures and stop using the word “theory” all together as its definition has become so muddled.
By the way, I have asked Santa Claus to bring me Krauss’s new book, “Hiding in the Mirror”
No comments:
Post a Comment