(Warning: One of the two hosts maaay have revealed their Popperian dogmatism a bit throughout this episode. Whichever host that is - they shall remain unnamed - apologizes quietly and stubbornly under their breath.)

Check out Tamler's website, his podcast (Very Bad Wizards), or follow him on twitter (@tamler).

We discuss

• What is the problem of induction?
• Whether regularities really exist in nature
• The difference between certainty and justification
• Popper's solution to the problem of induction
• If whiskey will taste like orange juice next week
• What makes a good theory?
• Why prediction is secondary to explanation for Popper
• If science and meditiation are in conflict
• The boundaries of science
  

References

• Very Bad Wizards episode on induction
• The problem of induction, by Wesley Salmon
• Hume on induction

Errata

• Vaden mentions in the episode how "Einstein's theory is better because it can explain earth's gravitational constant". He got some of the details wrong here - it's actually the inverse square law, not the gravitational constant. Listen to Edward Witten explain it much better here.

Socials

• Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani, @tamler
• Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
• Trust in our regularity and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here.
• Click dem like buttons on youtube

If you are a Very Bad Wizards listener, hello! We're exactly like Tamler and David, except younger. Come join the Cult of Popper over at incrementspodcast@gmail.com

Image credit: From this Aeon essay on Hume. Illustration by Petra Eriksson at Handsome Frank.

Special Guest: Tamler Sommers.

Support Increments

Follow David on Twitter (@DavidDeutschOxf) or find his website here.

We discuss

• Whether belief is a fruitful lens through which to analyze ideas
• Whether a non-quantitative form of belief can be defended
• How does belief bottom out epistemologically?
• Whether statistics and probability are useful
• Where should statistics and probability be used in practice?
• The Popper-Miller theorem
• Statements vs propositions and their relevance for truth
• Whether Popper and Deutsch disagree about truth

References

• The Popper-Miller theorem. See the original paper
• David's 2021 talk on the correspondence theory of truth
• David's talk on physics without probability.
• Hempel's paradox
• The Beginning of Infinity
• Knowledge and the Body-Mind Problem

Socials

• Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani, @DavidDeutschOxf
• Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
• Believe in us and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here.
• Click dem like buttons on youtube

What's the truth about your belief on the probability of useful statistics? Tell us over at incrementspodcast@gmail.com.

Special Guest: David Deutsch.

Support Increments

We discuss

• Potty training, taking babies seriously, and adult diapers
• Why Vaden never daydreams, fantasizes, or minds spending 10 hours in a car
• Whether the subjective notions of certainty, belief, or confidence deserve a spot in the objective world of epistemology
• Whether sports are authoritarian
• Whether spreading Popper's epistemology is a moral imperative
• The role of school and educational institutions
• Whether emergence is the result of the interplay between physical reality and the reality of abstraction

Questions

1. (Tom) Can any thinking take place completely independent of any certainty (explicitly acknowledged or inexplicit) whatsoever? Or can we introduce alternative terms to 'certainty' and 'confidence' to describe how individuals process their convictions, consent, and agreement? If 'certainty' and 'confidence' connote justificationism, can a fallibilist dismiss these terms entirely?

2. (Tom) Can fallibilism, anti-authoritarianism, anti-justificationism, and critical rationalism overall operate effectively in the highly competitive space of sports, especially professional sports?

3. (Andrew) If our best theory of how to make rapid progress comes from Popper's epistemology, should making it more widely known/understood be considered a moral imperative? If not, why? If so, thoughts?

4. (Andrew) This one has been hanging about in my notes for a couple of years so I'm not sure it's a great question any more, but something zingy about the interplay between reality, abstractions and their effects on each other has pushed me to add it here: Is emergence the result of the interplay between physical reality and the reality of abstractions?

Socials

• Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
• Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
• Help us pay for diapers and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help with Diarrhea removal here).
• Click dem like buttons on youtube over hur.

Who is more annoying in the mornings? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.com

Support Increments