Science vs. Meaning
-
- Posts: 416
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm
Science vs. Meaning
Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.
According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".
I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.
The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.
According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".
I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.
The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
Have you ever heard of social sciences? Psychology, sociology, cultural anthropology, history, literature?philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.
According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".
I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.
The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.
You have a pretty skewed sense of reality. I'm not going to argue, you have all the right as an individual to hold your views. But if you opened your mind up just a bit, you'd see that reality is not as you imagine it.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
Have you ever heard of social sciences? Psychology, sociology, cultural anthropology, history, literature?philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.
According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".
I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.
The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.
You have a pretty skewed sense of reality. I'm not going to argue, you have all the right as an individual to hold your views. But if you opened your mind up just a bit, you'd see that reality is not as you imagine it.
-
- Posts: 416
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm
Re: Science vs. Meaning
I'm not talking about scientists. I'm talking about proponents of Scientism, a philosophy on its own, which I slightly disagree with.-1- wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:26 am Have you ever heard of social sciences? Psychology, sociology, cultural anthropology, history, literature?
You have a pretty skewed sense of reality. I'm not going to argue, you have all the right as an individual to hold your views. But if you opened your mind up just a bit, you'd see that reality is not as you imagine it.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
Right. All of those are demonstrable facts. You do the experiments, work out the maths, and by so doing gain some control over your environment. Hey presto, your a scientist.philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pmThe scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
The thing is, you can attach any meaning you like to the facts. It makes fuck all difference to the facts, but if you're gonna invent some "MEANING", yer might as well get up to speed with the facts. Check out this forum, at least half the contributors jump straight to 'meaning' with no idea about facts.philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pmBut this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
The standards for "evidence" are ambiguous across different scientific disciplines to say the least.
Some admit more noise than signal. This xkcd comes to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/
Re: Science vs. Meaning
Indeed, but some things are blindingly obvious.
Which is why anyone in their right mind avoids normative injunctions like the pox.Logik wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:13 amSome admit more noise than signal. This xkcd comes to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/
Re: Science vs. Meaning
The physics of epistemology / ontology (I don't know which is which, but still) :
1. Facts are solidified opinions.
2. Facts weaken under extreme heat and pressure.
3. Truth is elastic.
1. Facts are solidified opinions.
2. Facts weaken under extreme heat and pressure.
3. Truth is elastic.
Re: Science vs. Meaning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtAmy_7JF0Uphilosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.
According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".
I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.
The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.
But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.
2:15-2:25 mark.