Sure, in the case of severely flawed theories. And you’ll have to judge how flawed before you stop believing (or severaly downgrade their likelihood if you’re thinking in Bayesian terms). I agree that you don’t need an alternative theory, and stand corrected.
But rejecting a theory without a better alternative can be suspicious, which is what I was trying to get at.
If you accept some theories with a flaw (like “I believe humans have moral worth even though we don’t have a good theory of consciousness”) while rejecting others because they have that same flaw, you might expect to be accused of inconsistency, or even motivated reasoning if your choices let you do something rewarding (like continuing to eat delicious honey).
But rejecting a theory without a better alternative can be suspicious
Nah, I still disagree, the set of theories is vast, one being promoted to my attention is not strong evidence it is more true than all of those that haven’t. People can separately be hypocritical or inconsistent, but that’s something that should be argued for directly
Sure, in the case of severely flawed theories. And you’ll have to judge how flawed before you stop believing (or severaly downgrade their likelihood if you’re thinking in Bayesian terms). I agree that you don’t need an alternative theory, and stand corrected.
But rejecting a theory without a better alternative can be suspicious, which is what I was trying to get at.
If you accept some theories with a flaw (like “I believe humans have moral worth even though we don’t have a good theory of consciousness”) while rejecting others because they have that same flaw, you might expect to be accused of inconsistency, or even motivated reasoning if your choices let you do something rewarding (like continuing to eat delicious honey).
Nah, I still disagree, the set of theories is vast, one being promoted to my attention is not strong evidence it is more true than all of those that haven’t. People can separately be hypocritical or inconsistent, but that’s something that should be argued for directly