Figural !

A. G. Maisey · 29th June 2014, 02:05 PM

I'm in complete agreement with you Michael, but I prefer to take the concepts of "truth", "fact", and "accuracy", just a little further.

There was an economist named Fritz Machlup. He was an Austrian, but he migrated to America before WWII.

He came up with the proposal that there was a "half-life of knowledge", this was given as the length of time that had to pass before half of the knowledge in any specific field was either shown to be untrue or was replaced with a more up-to-date version.

As time goes by the residual half of knowledge that remains from the initial degradation of the field becomes less and less so that eventually nothing, or perhaps almost nothing is left that can still be considered to be true.

Machlup died some time in the early 1960's, just about the time I was being taught about his ideas.

Not long ago a mathematician named Sam Arbesman published a book called "The Half-Life of Facts". Arbesman has demonstrated that the ideas that we accept as "facts" are slowly being replaced, and although we can never guess when any particular "fact" is going to go under, we can predict when half the facts in any specific field are going become out-dated.

An idea not dissimilar to Machlup's idea.

The accepted "facts" in any field have differing lives. Half the facts in the field of maths will be revised/replaced in about 9 or 10 years. Half the facts in the field of physics are good for about 13 years. And so on.

Now, with the keris, we're not dealing with perceived "facts" for most of the time, rather, we are dealing with opinions and beliefs.

I'm not at all sure how we can estimate the half-life of keris opinions, but I guess somebody who is much better at math than I am could come up with a formula. However, its probably not all that important how long our opinions and beliefs resist change, what is important is that we recognise that those opinions and beliefs will change, and that at some time in the future much, or most, of what we accept as "fact" today will have been demonstrated to be incorrect.

For this reason, I would most humbly suggest that none of us should become so entwined in our own beliefs and opinions that we are unable to give consideration to the beliefs and opinions of others.

29th June 2014, 02:05 PM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	I'm in complete agreement with you Michael, but I prefer to take the concepts of "truth", "fact", and "accuracy", just a little further. There was an economist named Fritz Machlup. He was an Austrian, but he migrated to America before WWII. He came up with the proposal that there was a "half-life of knowledge", this was given as the length of time that had to pass before half of the knowledge in any specific field was either shown to be untrue or was replaced with a more up-to-date version. As time goes by the residual half of knowledge that remains from the initial degradation of the field becomes less and less so that eventually nothing, or perhaps almost nothing is left that can still be considered to be true. Machlup died some time in the early 1960's, just about the time I was being taught about his ideas. Not long ago a mathematician named Sam Arbesman published a book called "The Half-Life of Facts". Arbesman has demonstrated that the ideas that we accept as "facts" are slowly being replaced, and although we can never guess when any particular "fact" is going to go under, we can predict when half the facts in any specific field are going become out-dated. An idea not dissimilar to Machlup's idea. The accepted "facts" in any field have differing lives. Half the facts in the field of maths will be revised/replaced in about 9 or 10 years. Half the facts in the field of physics are good for about 13 years. And so on. Now, with the keris, we're not dealing with perceived "facts" for most of the time, rather, we are dealing with opinions and beliefs. I'm not at all sure how we can estimate the half-life of keris opinions, but I guess somebody who is much better at math than I am could come up with a formula. However, its probably not all that important how long our opinions and beliefs resist change, what is important is that we recognise that those opinions and beliefs will change, and that at some time in the future much, or most, of what we accept as "fact" today will have been demonstrated to be incorrect. For this reason, I would most humbly suggest that none of us should become so entwined in our own beliefs and opinions that we are unable to give consideration to the beliefs and opinions of others.