(Thread) Kevin is now relying on people not knowing anything about philosophy to hide the failure of this excuse. He says that he doesn't care if theories are true because he is an anti-realist and only cares if they are "empirically adequate" and has referenced Van Fraassen..
implying he is what's called a constructive empiricist. This view point is motivated by the idea that scientific theories often predict observable phenomenon via theories that posit entities that we cannot directly observe (e.g. various particles). Historically science has... 
gotten progressively better at predicting things while most of the theories of the past concerning unobservables where simply wrong. Moreover, any given set of observations can be accounted for by multiple theories, and certain views about language suggest...
that referencing unobservables can't actually be meaningful beyond direct observations. So, some people think we should take the predictive validity of science seriously but we shouldn't think it can give us true theories beyond direct observation. That's the basic idea. I'm..
not going to argue for or against it as that's not needed. We are talking about whether racial groups can get along and behave in the same ways. That is all directly observable and so truth apt on constructive empiricism. Secondly, when Kevin was asked about equality he...
did not say that he doesn't care about some unobservable aspect of equality so long as things work well in the directly observable world. He said he didn't care about truth (with no constraint referencing observation) and that he just did science for fun. It thus seems likely...
he really doesn't care about truth but is now trying to hide this behind ideas that he assumes people are unfamiliar with. Imo, that's the best explanation for his incoherent gesture towards constructive empiricism to explain why he doesn't care if a multiracial society can work.
