Science vs. Meaning

[philosopher]

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.

[-1-]

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.

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.

[-1-]

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.

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.

[philosopher]

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.

I'm not talking about scientists. I'm talking about proponents of Scientism, a philosophy on its own, which I slightly disagree with.

[uwot]

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.

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.

But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING.

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.

[Logik]

Check out this forum, at least half the contributors jump straight to 'meaning' with no idea about facts.

Well... what do you mean by "facts" ?

[uwot]

Check out this forum, at least half the contributors jump straight to 'meaning' with no idea about facts.

Well... what do you mean by "facts" ?

Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.

[Logik]

Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.

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/

[uwot]

Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.

The standards for "evidence" are ambiguous across different scientific disciplines to say the least.

Indeed, but some things are blindingly obvious.

Some admit more noise than signal. This xkcd comes to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/

Which is why anyone in their right mind avoids normative injunctions like the pox.

[-1-]

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.

[gaffo]

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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtAmy_7JF0U

2:15-2:25 mark.