Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:52 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:28 pm False, I define my terms...you resort to ad-hominums when you cannot define your own.
You get to define your terms. You get to define your inference rules.
You get to define your introduction and elimination rules.
You get to define your conclusions, consequences and your predictions.

You don't get to define the outcomes of your experiment.

It doesn't matter how beautiful the guess is. It doesn't matter how smart you are or what your name is. If it disagrees with experiment - it's wrong
Actually all the sciences, as a group endeavor, get to define their terms/inference/introduction/elimination rules considering rules are merely boundaries of interpretation. They are limits which give definition to phenomenon...nothing more. Conclusions, consequences and predictions follow the same nature with the nature of these limits (whether they exist through rules or non-rules) existing through the context in which they are applied.

Actually the outcomes of experiments are already defined by the premises. If I set an experiment in x context, then "x" has a limited number of answers that will result...thus all premises at minimum create a set of probable intepretations before the experiment even begins.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:54 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:28 pm how scientific are you?
I am as "scientific" as the error rate and utility of the models I construct.

The more errors I can detect/correct in my own thinking - the more "scientific" I become.

The goal is to be less wrong, not more right.
Good...is this model you go by 100% accurate in determining an increase in success?
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Arising_uk »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tell me a universally agreed upon interpretation of "science", "evidence" and "proof"...I don't want others to miss what religious dogmatist you are.
I've already told you you loon, there can be no 'universally' agreed anything, that is for metaphysical loons like yourself but what there is is a general agreement as to what we can intersubjectively agree upon and that is experimental science and what that involves is at base the ability to replicate another's experiments, something your dowsers and 'pyramid wizards' are incapable of achieving and as such are basically full of shit.
Save the science book thumping and your ritual sacrifices on the laboratory tables of sciences as "offering proof for our salvation" fanaticism. It's delusional.
The only delusional loon here is you as you are so wrapped-up in your metaphysic that you cannot grasp what it is the natual philosophers did(and please do not repeat the claim that the ancients were as such as they weren't) and that was to destroy metaphysicians such as you. Hence you cannot even reproduce the results from your 'experiments' and resort to all this waffle and bullshit about 'science' when any Philosopher of Science knows there is no such thing as 'Science' just the subjects that use the experimental method. The only reason why you produce all this waffle is that you are unable to achieve in the subjects of the time but think yourself a much maligned 'genius' but if you were then you'd be able to at least achieve in the last subject available to such as you, Philosophy. But its quite clear that you also unable to get to grips with this subject as well as you are unwilling to learn from anyone and so have taught yourself piecemeal but because you have already decided what is the case you have only found what supports you and have not engaged in what Philosophy has become which is critique and especially self-critique. Now for all I know you may well be the next Hegel(you're certainly impenetrable enough) but you will never be as such, as even he understood that you have to have read what has been said previously and you are too up your own arse or even psychological incapable of facing critique of your ideas and amending them, me I think it because you are a loon but maybe it's just that you are actually dumber than you think you are. Not that I care as with your insistence on claiming that the Egyptians built the pyramids with dowsing rods and that the Russians have show that pyraminds cure aids, mental illness, improve crop yields,, etc, etc and that you can detect EM fields with your dowsing rods but are unwilling to prove it with a few basic experimental methods you have shown youself to be a compete and utter nut-job.
Toodles.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:17 pm Good...is this model you go by 100% accurate in determining an increase in success?
No. It's accurate enough for me to get by.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Arising_uk wrote: Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tell me a universally agreed upon interpretation of "science", "evidence" and "proof"...I don't want others to miss what religious dogmatist you are.
I've already told you you loon, there can be no 'universally' agreed anything, that is for metaphysical loons like yourself but what there is is a general agreement as to what we can intersubjectively agree upon and that is experimental science and what that involves is at base the ability to replicate another's experiments, something your dowsers and 'pyramid wizards' are incapable of achieving and as such are basically full of shit.


I am not making any claims other than the grounds of the actually experiment...not more or less than that. If there is no universal agreement...then what you are pushing is personal opinion.
Save the science book thumping and your ritual sacrifices on the laboratory tables of sciences as "offering proof for our salvation" fanaticism. It's delusional.
The only delusional loon here is you as you are so wrapped-up in your metaphysic that you cannot grasp what it is the natual philosophers did(and please do not repeat the claim that the ancients were as such as they weren't) and that was to destroy metaphysicians such as you.

Science is the observation of the replication of patterns that allows for the definition of "existence"...it is recursive by nature and as such is grounded in metaphysics.

Hence you cannot even reproduce the results from your 'experiments' and resort to all this waffle and bullshit about 'science' when any Philosopher of Science knows there is no such thing as 'Science' just the subjects that use the experimental method.

Then you cannot really criticize can you considering it is "just the subjects that use the experimental method."

The only reason why you produce all this waffle is that you are unable to achieve in the subjects of the time but think yourself a much maligned 'genius' but if you were then you'd be able to at least achieve in the last subject available to such as you, Philosophy.

No, it is an empirical experiment (incomplete relative to testing in other contexts) that sets a premise for tying ancient philosophical methods to empirical practice by showing there is very little, if no, gap at all between the subject and object.

But its quite clear that you also unable to get to grips with this subject as well as you are unwilling to learn from anyone and so have taught yourself piecemeal but because you have already decided what is the case you have only found what supports you and have not engaged in what Philosophy has become which is critique and especially self-critique.

Critique and self-critique is the analysis of pattern (interal to the "I" or "external") that allows for a set of patterns to be observed. These "patterns", which exist as "definition", set the grounds for how we percieve reality.

Now for all I know you may well be the next Hegel(you're certainly impenetrable enough) but you will never be as such, as even he understood that you have to have read what has been said previously and you are too up your own arse or even psychological incapable of facing critique of your ideas and amending them, me I think it because you are a loon but maybe it's just that you are actually dumber than you think you are.

You keep pushing "science" as an objective truth but then state noone can agree as to what it is...that is what a loon does. Your "critiques" are self-contradictions of your own accord.


Not that I care as with your insistence on claiming that the Egyptians built the pyramids with dowsing rods and that the Russians have show that pyraminds cure aids, mental illness, improve crop yields,, etc, etc and that you can detect EM fields with your dowsing rods but are unwilling to prove it with a few basic experimental methods you have shown youself to be a compete and utter nut-job.
Toodles.

And what experimental methods are those? The dowsing rods where meant to be used with the context of a person holding them...that is what they always have been historically. To take them out of context is to change the experiment and effectively be unscientific.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:27 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:17 pm Good...is this model you go by 100% accurate in determining an increase in success?
No. It's accurate enough for me to get by.
Then you are just pushing a relativisitic subjectivity.
Skepdick
Posts: 14364
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:52 pm Then you are just pushing a relativisitic subjectivity.
I am not. Objectivity is subjective.

That's not a contradiction. You just haven't figured out what it means yet.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Pyramids of the Ancient Pre-Socratics as a Physicalization of Abstract Philosophical Theory

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:55 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:52 pm Then you are just pushing a relativisitic subjectivity.
I am not. Objectivity is subjective.

That's not a contradiction. You just haven't figured out what it means yet.
Then there is some confusion in how we are explaining our thoughts because I actually agree to the above statement in part. However subjectivity also results in objectivity when it cancels itself out. Subject and Object are One from the perspective of "the All".
Post Reply