Critical Rationalist Biology
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.
Abstract
WARNING: GENETIC ENGINEERING IS DANGEROUS. Also, ANTI-racism is a moral imperative.
Critical Rationalist Biology. Biology under critical rationalist epistemology contains information theory. Critical rationalism is self-critical rationalist epistemology. Thereby self-critically asserting reason as the foundation of knowledge. Information theory successfully acknowledges both evolution and possible creationism. Information theory notes constructivism's dominance, while privilege is heritable. No gene is 100% known to be a certain trait. Critical rationalist biology sets the stage for critical theory such as CRT. Evolution may have happened yet no acquired mutation can turn other animals human. Without at least partial free will(the fundamental choice to focus on life) human reason would be impossible. So, free will is compatible with determinism. Parts of life are choices while others are not. Previously, the author has charted other sciences with critical rationalism. For context, the essay covers the epistemology itself then those two disciplines. Comte's Hierarchy of sciences contrasts with falsifiability ranking "astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology" from simplest to complex(Simonton 2015). Heuristically, more falsifiable science is less complex. Astronomy is the most falsifiable. Physics is the second most falsifiable. Biology is the second most complex. Sociology is the most complex. Humans are complex thus, social sciences rely on heuristics.
Supplementary resource (1)
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Perhaps Wolfram Alpha, using cellular automata, could demonstrate the simplest, and least risky, genetic engineering methods by modeling the specific nature with computer programs instead of equations.
"Are mathematical equations the best way to model nature? For many years it had been assumed that they were. But in the early 1980s, Stephen Wolfram made the radical proposal that one should instead build models that are based directly on simple computer programs. Wolfram made a detailed study of a class of such models known as cellular automata, and discovered a remarkable fact: that even when the underlying rules are very simple, the behavior they produce can be highly complex, and can mimic many features of what we see in nature" (Wolfram 1994).
Work Cited
“Cellular Automata and Complexity: Collected Papers: Wolfram, Stephen: 9780201626643: Amazon.com: Books.” Amazon.com, February 21, 1994, www.amazon.com/Cellular-Automata-Complexity-Collected-Papers/dp/0201626640. Accessed 4 Aug. 2024.
Assuming all individuals' with the dominant traits and genes already carry the recessive versions, is engineering for the recessive possible by...
,for the lack of a better term, genetically highlighting the carried recessive genes and traits?
1)Genetically engineering a strong enough specific somatic mutation could transform an individual’s dominant traits into the recessive ones.
2)Genetically engineering a strong enough specific germinal mutation could transform an individual’s dominant genes into the recessive ones.
References
1)https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382741189_Could_the_future_of_genetic_engineering_be_inducing_both_somatic_and_germ_line_mutations_to_obtain_recessive_traits_and_genes_How_specifically
Of course in chemistry class, especially on EXAMS, students should abide by their professors or suffer the consequences (usually poor grades). In engineering, the thin line between proto and current sciences must be acknowledged with critical rationalism, or products may suffer. Theory is not fact. Science MUST be falsifiable.
Critical rationalist parapsychology could (and will) be very rigorous because Occram's Razor, the law of identity, scientific method, and other measures. Similar to critical rationalist physics:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381469939_Critical_Rationalist_Physics
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "parapsychology". Encyclopedia Britannica, 3 May. 2024, https://www.britannica.com/topic/parapsychology. Accessed 25 June 2024.
The phrase ‘social constructionism about race’ is so ambiguous that it is unable to convey anything very meaningful. I argue that the various versions of social constructionism about race are either false, overly broad, or better described as anti-realism about biological race. One of the central rhetorical purposes of social constructionism about race has been to serve as an alternative to biological racial realism. However, most versions of social constructionism about race are compatible with biological racial realism, and there are some race scholars who endorse both positions. Going a step further, David Reich has recently defended both social constructionism about race and racial hereditarianism. While Reich’s defense of racial hereditarianism is unconvincing, I show that most versions of social constructionism about race are indeed compatible with racial hereditarianism. I argue that we ought to replace the social constructionist “consensus” about race with the view that there are no races, only racialized groups.
Digital health data are multimodal and high-dimensional. A patient’s health state can be characterized by a multitude of signals including medical imaging, clinical variables, genome sequencing, conversations between clinicians and patients, and continuous signals from wearables, among others. This high volume, personalized data stream aggregated over patients’ lives has spurred interest in developing new artificial intelligence (AI) models for higher-precision diagnosis, prognosis, and tracking. While the promise of these algorithms is undeniable, their dissemination and adoption have been slow, owing partially to unpredictable AI model performance once deployed in the real world. We posit that one of the rate-limiting factors in developing algorithms that generalize to real-world scenarios is the very attribute that makes the data exciting—their high-dimensional nature. This paper considers how the large number of features in vast digital health data can challenge the development of robust AI models—a phenomenon known as “the curse of dimensionality” in statistical learning theory. We provide an overview of the curse of dimensionality in the context of digital health, demonstrate how it can negatively impact out-of-sample performance, and highlight important considerations for researchers and algorithm designers.
Auguste Comte suggested that the main sciences could be grouped into a hierarchical ordering that reflected their objective characteristics (viz., generality, dependence, and complexity). In particular, the empirical sciences could be placed in the following order: astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology. Although his idea was initially discredited in the sociology of science, subsequent research indicates that the conjecture has considerable empirical merit. Significantly, that research inserts psychology between biology and sociology, with significantly more proximity with biology. After replicating the earlier findings using new measures, the metatheoretical basis for the hierarchical arrangement is then examined. The article closes with suggestions for further empirical and theoretical research on psychology's placement in the hierarchical arrangement.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia
Jul. 2023,https://www.britannica.com/science/entropy-physics. Accessed 10 August
2023.Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "uncertainty principle". Encyclopedia
Britannica, 22 Jun. 2023, https://www.britannica.com/science/uncertainty-principle. Accessed 10
RESPECTFULLY, How Much Does Comte's Hierarchy of
- Alexander Ohnemus
Ohnemus, Alexander. "RESPECTFULLY, How Much Does Comte's Hierarchy of
Sciences Disagree with Popper's Critical Rationalism? Elaborations Welcome
Sciences Disagree with Popper's Critical Rationalism? Elaborations Welcome." ResearchGate,
Ohnemus University, 3 Apr. 2024,
www.researchgate.net/publication/379537033_RESPECTFULLY_how_much_does_Comte's_Hi
erarchy_of_Sciences_disagree_with_Popper's_Critical_Rationalism_Elaborations_welcome.