Leaderboard

nice choice of colours!

I love your question. Allow me to elaborate:(Read some questions I raised to Sean in other threads, as to those FS theories....wuxing, yinyang, ganzi, etc)just wish to see how he responds to some of those 'terrible and horrible' FS theories that most layman don't seem to understand in details but 'believing' the explanations so strong as if the sun will rise from the east tomorrow. (perhaps correspond the saying that says he who knows nothing doubt nothing) Some extracts: 'The purpose of a theory is to explain some aspects of real world. Thus many kinds of explanations are rightly called theories, not just scientific ones. I contend that philosophy too, if it is to be of any value, must consist of theories, about subjects that are not captured by any science. And by improving our understanding of what makes a theory good we can thus improve our understanding of FS." "A good theory must have content, it must assert that things operate in one way and rule out other possibilities. Now just because the theory seems like it is saying something doesn’t mean it actually has content. The simplest, and best, way to determine if a theory has content is to see whether it can be refuted. If a theory can’t be refuted then it implies that it either does a very poor job of explaining, or that the objects of the theory are disconnected from the real world. And both of these faults imply that the theory only seems to explain, only seems to have content. So, even if we don’t plan on systematically testing the theory, whether it can, in principle, be falsified is one way to judge the quality of the explanation it provides........." "Freudian psychology fails to be falsifiable not because the theory is unclear but because the objects of the theory don’t seem to correspond to anything real. Freudian psychology posits an ego-superego-id structure to explain human behavior. How the ego superego and id interact is pretty clearly spelled out in the theory, so the problem is not that the theory doesn’t say anything definite about the theoretical objects it posits to explain phenomena. The problem lies in the way judgements about the ego superego and id (like the 12 earthy branches judgements, the Heavenly stem judgements)....." My answer to your question (base on assumed fact that K has not engaged S): You're asking K a value-judgements question (how do you know that he is good ?), and also a right/wrong question (since you never engaged him) which usually has more factual connotation. K is merely passing on his factual judgements on new/old reno vs new hand and old hand. He also passing on personal value judgement that a young chap can do as well as anyone if given the opportunity (new reno). You agree a young chap can do new reno/fs audit well?