TRP and Science 2 (was: Science Plays God)

[Monte Davis]

AW> science is more prone to this lie [claiming truth] than the makers of
wit and fiction

 

That's the nub of it, isn't it? Sadly, like so many Aliceisms, it falls
apart under examination. Scientific "truth" is always provisional, with
explicit procedures for testing it. When you publish experimental results
and offer your explanation, the journal will send it back if it doesn't have
a section on "what are the other possible explanations, and what are the
detailed reasons for choosing mine over any of the others?". and another on
"if I'm right, that implies corollaries and consequences that should be
tested by further experiments A, B and C."  

 

One does come across that in the best history, criticism, etc., but less
frequently and typically with  much less rigor. 

 

The idea that scientists go around thinking "I have the cold stone Truth,
unlike those vague fuzzy generalizations they have over in the arts and
letters quad," is pure - what's that word you like so much? - projection.

 

From: owner-pynchon-l at waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org] On Behalf
Of alice wellintown
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:48 PM
To: pynchon -l
Subject: Re: TRP and Science 2 (was: Science Plays God)

 

I don't get the two cultures thing you are  stuck on. There is pleasure in
science, and in art, in math, and in fiction. Fiction, as Huck says, is
stretches of what is mainly truth, but it don't make no claims to it.  And,
as for pleasure, there is more in lies, in invention, in fiction, than in
truth. Who claims truth....as Wicks says...and science is more prone to this
lie than the makers of wit and fiction and that, as a wise poet once said,
makes all the difference when you come to the fork in the road and take it. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130613/c7d1f38a/attachment.html>