From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Software Engineering and Dreamers
Date: 1997/06/07
Message-ID: <dewar.865690387@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 246810519
References: <JSA.97May14201336@alexandria> <5mmvgj$61k@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>
 <dewar.865041126@merv> <19970602.562B58.2B32@ai110.du.pipex.com>
 <5n1261$qj6@polo.demon.co.uk> <19970602.433020.144E5@ai078.du.pipex.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Mat said

<<Since the above theories make the same predictions, no experimental test can
distinguish between them. And yet no right-minded scientist would believe my
crocodile theory. Why not?
>>

We have not seen your crocodile theory, so guesses as to whether or not it
might be accepted are silly. Note that in using the word crocodile, you are
appealing to an informal notion of reality which might or might not be
helpful. Perhaps it would be better to call it your crocjunk theory to
avoid unnecessary associations (though sometimes these associations are
useful).

We choose between theories on the basis of predictive power, and if we have
two competing theories then we choose the simpler one in Occam's sense.