Quote:
Originally Posted by Blowtus
Is their more worth to an explanation that that it allows us a measure of accuracy in our predictions? For someone exhibiting enough signs that we deem them to 'love' someone else, it can reasonably be assumed from such that they will also exhibit a propensity to look after the other in times of illness. There need not be any objective accuracy of explanation in our toolset of understanding if the toolset demonstates it's worth to us in the predictions it allows.
|
my point, though, was that you're just adding words.
call it 'love' when what you want is a person to be well
call it 'dedication' when what you want is your garden to be well
call it 'dependance' when what you want is your car to be well
I predict you'll water the garden and make sure the car meets roadworthy standards because of my insight into your dedication and dependence... all I'm saying is 'I think that if you're smart you'll do what one needs to do to get what they want, to get what you want', and giving new names to what you want. the explanatory power hasn't increased.
The same problem is raised in philosophy of science when considering instincts, when we say 'oh, he did that because of instinct'...great, we've named why he does it. why did I heal from cancer, god made a miracle happen, there we have it, the process that has occurred has been explained. ...no, it's been labelled, we've given a label to that which we hope to be able to explain but haven't yet done.
seems to be the same sort of obfuscation to me.