Looking into Central Governor Theory.
Some philosophers of science make distinction between researchers who put emphasis on experiments (empiricists) and those who try to propose theories (rationalists). Even though
the great majority of the scientists look for evidence to support their theories, that is impossible
because of the induction logic failure. This failure happens because, through this kind of logic,
it is impossible to talk about absolute truth, the only thing that can be talked about is statistical
probability. What the scientists should do is demonstrate theory mistakes with empirical tests.
Those theories, which could be refuted through evidence, are in agreement with the demarcation
criterion between science and metaphysics
The scientific knowledge evolution occurs by correcting those theoretical mistakes, or by replacing that theory for another one with more complete and/or precise predictions. Sometimes several researchers cannot correct those mistakes, thus they use the relativism to explain their failure. For them, science is built with a deal among scientists to accept one theory or “paradigm”. Sometimes a crisis happens, because these paradigms do not work for all scientific community. Because of such crisis, those paradigms must be changed. That is Kuhn’s scientific revolution. In this case, those scientists are being pessimistic with the possibility to reach the objective truth. Unhappily, that strategy is used to support the Central Governor Theory (CGT).
One very important issue to help us choose the best theory is about its informative content. It is important to remember that the whole probability of one theory is equal to the product of each enunciate probability.
Sport Exerc Med Open J. 2016; 3(1): 8-9. doi: 10.17140/SEMOJ-3-14
