RE: [Fis] Re: fis Digest, Vol 490, Issue 2

> In summary -- testable hypotheses -- testable, testable, testable.
> Without that, we have at best distinctions with no pragmatic
> difference. That means no information.

Dear John:

Yes, this is fine with me as long as "testable" does not mean returning to
the ontological assumptions about an external "reality" against which one
has to test. The "reality" which one assumes in psychological systems
(Cogito) or social systems (cogitatum) is not of that nature; it is not res
extensa.

This does not preclude that we may be able to construct tests, for example,
for Markov properties of the distribution, etc., but much depends then on
the operationalization and the theory of measurement. The epistemic objects
have to be constructed. Unlike biology, the social sciences cannot proceed
irreflexively in this respect because they can no longer assume a "nature"
out there.

"Nature" as a given implies the Leibnizian assumption, as we agreed in a
previous exchange. We are no longer considering an order which was given (in
the revelation), but an order which is emerging on the basis of interaction
and recursion/incursion.

For example, in a relatively straightforward study with Nienke Oomes I
studied the emergence of the European Monetary System during the 1980s and
the 1990s. We could show when in the early 1990s the Markov property became
a better predictor than the assumption of independent development of
European currencies which co-evolved with the German mark. Thus, one is
sometimes able to test hypotheses against each other.

Similarly, in a study with Koen Frenken we could show that the DC4
functioned as the dominant design in aircraft development rather than the
DC3. These were relatively simple operationalizations. The
operationalization of a meaning-processing system would be much more
complex.

With best wishes,

Loet

References:

Loet Leydesdorff & Nienke Oomes, Is the European Monetary System Converging
to Integration? Social Science Information 38 (1999) 57-86.

Koen Frenken & Loet Leydesdorff, Scaling Trajectories in Civil Aircraft
(1913-1997), Research Policy 29(3) (2000) 331-348

Are EU Networks Anticipatory Systems? An empirical and analytical approach,
in: Daniel M. Dubois (Ed.), Computing Anticipatory Systems -- CASYS'99
(Woodbury, NY: American Physics Institute, 2000), pp. 171-181.

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Sun Feb 12 08:56:53 2006