philosophy of science dead? realism vs. empiricism (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, September 14, 2016, 12:25 (2773 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I have already agreed that this SEGMENT (your word) of the overall pattern has been proved. - DAVID: Fine. I agree. If so why do you state this about it:
"even if the pattern proves to be as changeable as the weather". Stated in the beginning of this reply of yours. By putting it in juxtaposition perhaps you will realize your comments about this are all over the place. - You are confused. You quoted this in your post of 12 September at 18.12, so you could allege that I was “wiggling”. I reproduced it together with your wiggly reply in order to supply the context for my own reply. The original quote (which had ended my post of 12.9 at 12.21), was:
dhw: But this is getting us nowhere. Your point was that the current pattern strongly suggests a mind, and my point was that no matter what pattern physicists come up with, you will still think it suggests a mind - even if the pattern proves to be as changeable as the weather. - “The pattern” refers to the unknown overall pattern, not the segment. The weather reference was to my post under “Any explanation for dark matter?” I wrote: “It may even be that the complete pattern of the universe is as changeable as that of the weather, with both predictable and unpredictable elements.” Your reply, in block capitals, was “YES!” - Once again, I propose we put an end to this particular discussion.