Saving Failure

As Robert Stirniman said: “Of all the forces we know, there is none stronger than a paradigm.”

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, in his The Gulag Archipelago, begins with a recounting of the “waves” in “our sewage disposal system.” Kulaks impeded the utopian reality – but their “removal” did not usher in the utopia! Further bureaucratic analysis “uncovered” a class of agricultural wreckers. These were “removed” – yet the utopia did not arrive. Then they discovered a kirov wave from Leningrad. Then there were etc, etc, etc waves to be removed! Never once was the socialist Theory wrong – they easily made ad hoc additions to save (some of) the appearances. They could save failure. That is, until Mikhail Gorbachov and Boris Yeltsin shut the “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” down.

Earlier, there had been the Theory of phlogiston (1667) to explain combustion. Phlogiston was a substance that burned. It had a number of added variants to save some appearances but that was not enough to save failure. Ultimately, the discovery of oxygen ended the Theory.
Then their were (are) aether theories. Brilliant Mathematical speculations that are now found to be amusing.

Present day astronomy has “confirmed” only 4% “normal matter.” The rest being made up of “dark matter” and “dark energy.” Their mathematical form of depth perception saves the appearances with ad hoc additions. It is more reasonable that astronomers are 4% right and 96% wrong. Their science : polyscience ratio is 1 : 24! They valiantly save failure.

Paul E Meehl, in his contribution to On Scientific Thinking, is almost poetic in his analysis of saving failure. “A failure to recognize …., inadequate appreciation of the extreme weakness of…., a fairly widespread use of ad hoc explanations. The ad hoc explanations have auxiliary hypotheses which they dutifully explore…. A zealous and clever investigator can work for years without ever once refuting or corroborating as much as a single strand of the network…. His true position is that of a potent-but-sterile intellectual rake.” What is their science : polyscience ratio? P U’s provide a strange, yet elite, educational experience!

How do these examples apply to the left-of-center network of social and entitlement Theories that presently cause such expense and uncertainty? As this network seeks to take over larger sections of a nation’s economy, they save failure by hiding failure with ad hoc verbosity! Their core values low science : polyscience ratio invites criticism, yet critics are greeted with sarcasm, intimidation and name calling. This elite name calling habit primarily identifies their elite P U training. P U’s must be granting advanced degrees in opinion instead of being content with theory-free knowledge

All these problems – yet their elite good news is that there is no sin! Perhaps this “good news” from Mathematical determinism is a sign of the walking dead.

Nonetheless, in the recent beginning, God ex nihilo created the universe. Atheorism replaces atheism.

9 thoughts on “Saving Failure

  • December 29, 2018 at 1:05 am
    Permalink

    I’ve been surfing online more than 3 hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours.

    It is pretty worth enough for me. In my view,
    if all webmasters and bloggers made good content as you did, the net will be
    much more useful than ever before.

    Reply
  • December 5, 2018 at 8:02 pm
    Permalink

    I am just commenting to make you be aware of of the magnificent experience our girl gained studying your site. She discovered a good number of details, which include what it’s like to have an amazing helping spirit to make other people completely comprehend specified extremely tough issues. You really did more than people’s expected results. I appreciate you for delivering these practical, safe, informative and easy tips about this topic to Janet.

    Reply
  • September 24, 2018 at 12:59 pm
    Permalink

    Howdy! I just wish to give you a huge thumbs up for your great information you have got here on this post.

    I am coming back to your blog for more soon.

    Reply
  • September 20, 2018 at 11:45 am
    Permalink

    I do consider all the ideas you have presented for your post.

    They’re really convincing and will certainly work. Nonetheless, the
    posts are too quick for beginners. Could you please prolong them a little from
    subsequent time? Thanks for the post.

    Reply
  • September 16, 2018 at 9:37 pm
    Permalink

    I enjoy looking through a post that can make people think.
    Also, thanks for allowing me to comment!

    Reply
  • May 31, 2018 at 1:49 am
    Permalink

    This is the perfect blog for anybody who hopes to find out about this topic.

    You realize so much its almost tough to argue with you (not
    that I really would want to…HaHa). You definitely put a new spin on a subject that’s
    been discussed for a long time. Great stuff, just excellent!

    Reply
  • March 23, 2018 at 12:01 am
    Permalink

    You have noted very interesting points ! ps nice website .

    Reply
  • September 6, 2016 at 11:13 am
    Permalink

    Thanx for a very informative blog. What else may I get that type of info written in such a perfect approach?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *