If one watches the TED talk by Astronomer Tabetha Boyajian, one will notice that she begins with Sagan’s aphorism on “extraordinary” claims. This inadvertently reveals just how significant epistemological concerns are in scientific undertakings.
Accordingly, for follow up, I post a corrective:
The issue in knowledge is not extraordinary evidence (an assertion that invites selective hyperskepticism) but instead adequate warrant so that claimed knowledge is indeed warranted, credibly true (and so also reliable). END
PS: It seems I need to add a clip I just made and annotated from a UKG paper on envisioning future scenarios for RW purposes, to illustrate a point on risk vs uncertainty i/l/o planning horizons — though, frankly, a U-UBSE (unknown unknown, black swan event) can hit you short term with v. little warning:
In for a penny, in for a pound. Let me add on the window of opportunity for change challenge i/l/o Machiavelli. This ties to how, often, after an over-the-cliff event, we can all indulge Monday Morning Quarterbacking — and to how hard it can be to be open minded enough to recognise weak, noise-beset signals of likely unwelcome realities and build enough of a critical mass to act in good time. and, statisticians and scenario modellers, I am looking straight at you:
See why I believe in war games, role-playing, BAU/ALT reflection and good old ZOPP?