wait, i’m trying to map this out for an AI and i’m confused about something.
above you said “the crucial (in my opinion) issue of recognizing decisive vs. indecisive arguments” is what labs were missing which goes beyond popper
and in your epistemology article you wrote:
This view highlights the importance of correctly judging whether an idea refutes another idea or not.
so correctly making that judgment is where the important work happens.
but then you said the process for doing it is “brainstorm what are key issues and expose that to criticism” and that “this method (conjectures and refutations) is used all over the place” and “isn’t really harder or easier than other things.”
i think i’m missing something because those seem like they’re pulling in different directions. if the method is standard C&R that’s used everywhere and isn’t especially hard, what makes it CF’s crucial contribution beyond popper? is the contribution more like defining the return type (boolean instead of float) rather than a new algorithm for computing it?
just trying to understand what i’d actually need to build differently if i were implementing CF vs implementing plain popper.