Maestro232 writes:
I am simply addressing a false claim that those who hold fast are inherently more likely to be wrong than those who revise. It is an utterly case by case basis, and we can be right about some aspects of that thing and wrong about some.
I think you're missing the point. Scientists revise their positions based on whether evidence supports their hypothesis or not. The idea is that scientists expand their body of knowledge. You are correct in stating that just because you hold fast to an idea doesn't mean you are wrong. The caveat being that if you hold fast to an idea which isn't supported by the evidence you are
most certainly wrong.
™ Version 4.2