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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Software Engineering and Dreamers
Date: 1997/06/10
Message-ID: <dewar.865941532@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 247442457
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>
 <33983ABE.26B2@sni.de> <19970606.49CA70..12B91@ae124.du.pipex.com>
 <865721794snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <339C6CDF.5E3@most.fw.hac.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Wes says

<<No, the problem with the crocodile theory is that its axioms 
(the existence of invisible crocodiles) are offensive to 
"right-thinking scientists."
 >>


As a practical description of how some scientists think, this is probably
accurate, but as a description of how they SHOULD think it is flawed. 
The history of science is full of incidents of scientists rejecting
superior (in a predictive sense) theories because they find them
offensive (e.g. Einstein's objections to Heisenberg's theories), but
such non-scientific reactions often stand in the way of progress. if
the crocodile theory had superior predictive capabilities, then it
should immediately be accepted by all scientists. In fact, the theory
does NOT have superior predictive capabilities, and is unnecessarily
complex, in that it proposes elements that cannot be deduced as useful
from observations, and which are therefore junk.