Is scientific knowledge the best?
Is scientific knowledge the best?
Science can be defines as the an organized and dynamic body of knowledge which is a result of careful investigation, by means of careful observation, measurement, experimentation, examination of records, and surveys. While science is a result of careful investigation, philosophy is based on reasoning, and religion is based on faith. Does this make science the supreme source of knowledge?
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
I'm afraid "scientists" are only asking comfortable questions. Nowhere have I seen at least an attempt to answer, for example, why the electric charge occurs only in multiples of e or why elementary particles arise only in complementary pairs…
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22700
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
"Scientists" of a certain kind, of course. But yes, that's so.
Or how about the question, "How can a mind be produced by a mere physical entity like the brain?" Or the question, "How can life have arisen from non-life?"
You're right: they focus on the questions -- and consider only the answers -- that fit within their Physicalist paradigm. Thomas Nagel took them to task for this sort of dead-end Physicalism in his latest book, "Mind and Cosmos." And they witch-hunted him because of it.
-
- Posts: 4384
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
which begs the question, why don't secondary particles flourish in incongruent pears?
-Imp
-Imp
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
The supreme source of knowledge... for what?Jori wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:45 am Science can be defines as the an organized and dynamic body of knowledge which is a result of careful investigation, by means of careful observation, measurement, experimentation, examination of records, and surveys. While science is a result of careful investigation, philosophy is based on reasoning, and religion is based on faith. Does this make science the supreme source of knowledge?
Knowledge is inherently instrumental. Appraising it on its own merits is incoherent.
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
No. Well all have personal knowledge that gets us through the day. But there is no doubt that if our beliefs could be tested scientifically we would find that we could believe nothing.Jori wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:45 am Science can be defines as the an organized and dynamic body of knowledge which is a result of careful investigation, by means of careful observation, measurement, experimentation, examination of records, and surveys. While science is a result of careful investigation, philosophy is based on reasoning, and religion is based on faith. Does this make science the supreme source of knowledge?
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
When it comes to the fundemental structure of the universe there are no answers to those questions simply bacause there are no reasons.
Why is every body in the universe attracted to every other body in the universe, which leads to the phenomenon of gravity??
WHilst science is the only discipline of knowledge capable of attempting that questions, and it has been asked by science despite your comments that it only addresses "comfortable" questions, scientists are smart enough to know that there are no reasons for that.
Why don't you be brave and try to answer some of those questions here on the Forum? Or are you content in your own comfort to avoid them?
What you will need to understand about science is that it's job is to intricately DESCRIBE the universe. It really has not interest in questions as to WHY.
If you want to know why, ask a priest. You can have a rainbow of all sorts of contradictory answers from different priests, immans and gurus that will be gushing with responses
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
Science has not avoided that "uncomfortable" question and it pretty much already has the answer.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:34 pm Or how about the question, "How can a mind be produced by a mere physical entity like the brain?" Or the question, "How can life have arisen from non-life?"
It's just that you want to maintain your sense of mysticism and have avoided their answers.
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
As far as the universal attraction of matter is concerned, it is perhaps the least interesting problem in physics for me. Matter deforms (relaxes?) the structure of physical space (aether) around it, which causes their mutual attraction - such as bubbles or fragments on the surface of water or as conductors carrying current in parallel (towards the future:) The question is how things are around antimatter…Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 9:44 amWhen it comes to the fundemental structure of the universe there are no answers to those questions simply bacause there are no reasons.
Why is every body in the universe attracted to every other body in the universe, which leads to the phenomenon of gravity??
WHilst science is the only discipline of knowledge capable of attempting that questions, and it has been asked by science despite your comments that it only addresses "comfortable" questions, scientists are smart enough to know that there are no reasons for that.
Why don't you be brave and try to answer some of those questions here on the Forum? Or are you content in your own comfort to avoid them?
What you will need to understand about science is that it's job is to intricately DESCRIBE the universe. It really has not interest in questions as to WHY.
If you want to know why, ask a priest. You can have a rainbow of all sorts of contradictory answers from different priests, immans and gurus that will be gushing with responses
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22700
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
Wow. I'm just astounded at how wrongly-informed...or perhaps just uninformed you are. And you don't seem to mind flaunting it...wow.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 9:46 amScience has not avoided that "uncomfortable" question and it pretty much already has the answer.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:34 pm Or how about the question, "How can a mind be produced by a mere physical entity like the brain?" Or the question, "How can life have arisen from non-life?"
Sorry; you're just dead wrong again. Go read any journal on the subject, and you'll find out you're wrong.
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
what you feel about it is not relevant to what I was saying.Cerveny wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 3:02 pmAs far as the universal attraction of matter is concerned, it is perhaps the least interesting problem in physics for me. Matter deforms (relaxes?) the structure of physical space (aether) around it, which causes their mutual attraction - such as bubbles or fragments on the surface of water or as conductors carrying current in parallel (towards the future:) The question is how things are around antimatter…Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 9:44 amWhen it comes to the fundemental structure of the universe there are no answers to those questions simply bacause there are no reasons.
Why is every body in the universe attracted to every other body in the universe, which leads to the phenomenon of gravity??
WHilst science is the only discipline of knowledge capable of attempting that questions, and it has been asked by science despite your comments that it only addresses "comfortable" questions, scientists are smart enough to know that there are no reasons for that.
Why don't you be brave and try to answer some of those questions here on the Forum? Or are you content in your own comfort to avoid them?
What you will need to understand about science is that it's job is to intricately DESCRIBE the universe. It really has not interest in questions as to WHY.
If you want to know why, ask a priest. You can have a rainbow of all sorts of contradictory answers from different priests, immans and gurus that will be gushing with responses
It does not change the fact that there are no explanations, there are just more intricate descriptions.
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 3:54 pmWow. I'm just astounded at how wrongly-informed...or perhaps just uninformed you are. And you don't seem to mind flaunting it...wow.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 9:46 amScience has not avoided that "uncomfortable" question and it pretty much already has the answer.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:34 pm Or how about the question, "How can a mind be produced by a mere physical entity like the brain?" Or the question, "How can life have arisen from non-life?"
Sorry; you're just dead wrong again. Go read any journal on the subject, and you'll find out you're wrong.
I'm not going to take refelctions from a moron who thinks a sky daddy is the answer to everything.
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22700
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
I'm sorry I missed this discussion earlier. I have to say, I am in total agreement with every one of your responses on this thread. Perhaps best summed up by, "It does not change the fact that there are no explanations, there are just more intricate descriptions. My own view is that science has no interest, as science, in why anything is what it is or does what it does (as if reality were contingent on something else (sky daddy?)--as the mystics on this thread like IC contend), science only seeks to identify what things actually are and what they actually do, NOT WHY.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 5:31 pmImmanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 3:54 pmWow. I'm just astounded at how wrongly-informed...or perhaps just uninformed you are. And you don't seem to mind flaunting it...wow.
Sorry; you're just dead wrong again. Go read any journal on the subject, and you'll find out you're wrong.
I'm not going to take refelctions from a moron who thinks a sky daddy is the answer to everything.
Since we're both instructed the only place to find the truth is in some journal, I guess we'll both be sent to our rooms to read some.
Re: Is scientific knowledge the best?
Indeed. Thanks for the support.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 3:33 pmI'm sorry I missed this discussion earlier. I have to say, I am in total agreement with every one of your responses on this thread. Perhaps best summed up by, "It does not change the fact that there are no explanations, there are just more intricate descriptions. My own view is that science has no interest, as science, in why anything is what it is or does what it does (as if reality were contingent on something else (sky daddy?)--as the mystics on this thread like IC contend), science only seeks to identify what things actually are and what they actually do, NOT WHY.Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 5:31 pmImmanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 3:54 pm
Wow. I'm just astounded at how wrongly-informed...or perhaps just uninformed you are. And you don't seem to mind flaunting it...wow.
Sorry; you're just dead wrong again. Go read any journal on the subject, and you'll find out you're wrong.
I'm not going to take refelctions from a moron who thinks a sky daddy is the answer to everything.
Since we're both instructed the only place to find the truth is in some journal, I guess we'll both be sent to our rooms to read some.
Sometimes I think I'm in a nuthouse.
There are so many people here who think they know the answer to everything, and completely lack humility.
IC is possibly the worst.
It seems obvious that in a world where everyone that thinks they know the answer to life the universe and everything, can never find clear agreement with everyone else who thinks they know the answer to life the universe and everything, it is doubtful than anyone could ever have an answer to what is likely to be a meaningless question in the first place.
They then go on to misuse and abuse philosophy as if it were a portal for them to express their false beliefs rather than a methodology to unpack those self same delusions.