>>11755108Under bayesian statistics, absence of evidence is weak or no observations at all, so the posterior will be almost identical to the prior distribution. It's really not the same thing at all as evidence of absence.
>>11755125I think you're talking about Kuhn with the paradigm shifts. Popper comes before him advocating falsificationism instead of logical positivism/verificationism. It seems that it was an advance but a very inappropriate framework for anything that is not classical physics.
> pretends they don't exist/aren't actually a problem because science is goodThey are a problem, I think their point here is that science should be valued based on its outcomes, not in the correctness of its process.
