RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it....

RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/23/2016 7:32:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: But not for hypotheticals which do not exist until they are realized. Then they are someplace but not before. Incorrect, even hypotheticals are somewhere, even if that somewhere is in your mind. The mere act of thinking of something gives it a form of existence. quote: Furthermore, I disagree. Somewhere is not everywhere because somewhere is fixed (though you know not where) whereas everywhere is limitless. No, somewhere is not necessarily fixed, it is in fact often indefinite (as in "where are my slippers?" "Somewhere."), and thus it can indeed be everywhere or anywhere. What's more, everywhere is always somewhere. Hypotheticals in the mind . . . so if your hypothetical is a fire breathing unicorn you have given it a form of existence? Really? . . . lol! Slippers . . . no, they are in a fixed place. If they were everywhere they would have to have a wave function until you found them. Can you calculate a wave function for your slippers? Probably not. [:D]

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/23/2016 7:41:56 PM)
quote: so if your hypothetical is a fire breathing unicorn you have given it a form of existence? Really? Yrs, it exists in your mind, and now in mine as well, and in the minds of everybody who reads these posts. And since it exists, even if only as a memory, it exists somewhere. quote: Slippers . . . no, they are in a fixed place. Yes and no. Let's say they are in the trunk of a car driving down the interstate, where are they? It is indeterminate, they remain in the same where (in the trunk) and yet they also exist in an infinite number of wheres (because they are travelling down the interstate). Now since they exist in an infinite number of wheres' they can be said to be everywhere, as that implies an infinite number of wheres.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/24/2016 7:22:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: so if your hypothetical is a fire breathing unicorn you have given it a form of existence? Really? Yrs, it exists in your mind, and now in mine as well, and in the minds of everybody who reads these posts. And since it exists, even if only as a memory, it exists somewhere. No, no, it does not exist; only a representation of the unicorn exists, not a reality. quote: Slippers . . . no, they are in a fixed place. quote: Yes and no. Let's say they are in the trunk of a car driving down the interstate, where are they? It is indeterminate, they remain in the same where (in the trunk) and yet they also exist in an infinite number of wheres (because they are travelling down the interstate). Now since they exist in an infinite number of wheres' they can be said to be everywhere, as that implies an infinite number of wheres. Nice try but you cannot assume they are in the trunk of a car because you don't know where they are. If you knew, they would not be lost. The best you can say is that they are somewhere which could be anywhere but could not be everywhere. If they were everywhere they would be where you were so they are not lost because you are somewhere in the everywhere. [:D]

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/24/2016 1:09:27 PM)
I'm afraid you are quite obviously incorrect, and either have missed the point, or more likely are pretending to hve in order to pretend you are correct.

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/24/2016 11:57:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML This raises the whole issue of the quality of unconsciousness. We know, I think, that there are different levels of consciousness when we sleep and when we are anesthetized. I wonder if total, blank unconsciousness is not just a false concept that arose from seeing people "knocked out" and then come awake again. Even patients in a vegetative state and those only minimally conscious show activity on brain scans. Yeah, it almost merits putting "unconsciousness" in quotes. At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. K.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 7:29:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML This raises the whole issue of the quality of unconsciousness. We know, I think, that there are different levels of consciousness when we sleep and when we are anesthetized. I wonder if total, blank unconsciousness is not just a false concept that arose from seeing people "knocked out" and then come awake again. Even patients in a vegetative state and those only minimally conscious show activity on brain scans. Yeah, it almost merits putting "unconsciousness" in quotes. At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. K. Exactly.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 7:31:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick I'm afraid you are quite obviously incorrect, and either have missed the point, or more likely are pretending to hve in order to pretend you are correct. Oh no. That is a non-reply reply by you. Game over. I win. lol! Thanks for playing (said without sarcasm but only in fun)

kdsub -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 8:34:43 AM)
Vince I believe you are remiss in not considering that philosophy is an integral part of science and there are areas where only philosophy will ever be able to speculate on the answers science may not be able to prove by experiment. In these cases without philosophy we could not even intelligently discuss them. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 12:23:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Vince I believe you are remiss in not considering that philosophy is an integral part of science and there are areas where only philosophy will ever be able to speculate on the answers science may not be able to prove by experiment. In these cases without philosophy we could not even intelligently discuss them. As a practical matter, "science" seems to mean two different things these days. One the one hand, a method for investigating our world and following the evidence no matter where it leads, and on the other a determination to explain virtually everything we observe in purely physical terms. In my view, the second is nothing more or less than an attempt to enlist science as a proxy warrior for a philosophical assumption that has become enshrined as doctrine. K.

kdsub -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 1:00:52 PM)
And philosophy can be used both ways. In the first it's a study in the knowledge of our reality and existence. In the second instance it's a guide for behavior. Myself I think a better use of Philosophy is in the first case where we just study knowledge and wherever it goes. In the second case that's not really science as far as I'm concerned that's stating a position then finding evidence to support it

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 4:53:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub And philosophy can be used both ways. In the first it's a study in the knowledge of our reality and existence. In the second instance it's a guide for behavior. Myself I think a better use of Philosophy is in the first case where we just study knowledge and wherever it goes. In the second case that's not really science as far as I'm concerned that's stating a position then finding evidence to support it We have different kinds of realities. We have physical realities, existential realities, social realities, psychological realities, mental/physiological realities, and maybe others too. So, which are you suggesting is a candidate for philosophical study? When you talk about a guide for behavior I think you run into a problem. It is that humans for the most part are tribal (in a non-territorial sense) so their behavior is often group behavior. In which case philosophies become ideologies and ideologies tend to devolve into corrupt dogma. That has been an historical problem I think. quote: Vince I believe you are remiss in not considering that philosophy is an integral part of science and there are areas where only philosophy will ever be able to speculate on the answers science may not be able to prove by experiment. In these cases without philosophy we could not even intelligently discuss them. Butch, I really disregard the definition of science as trying to "prove" something. My working definition is that doing science is building models that best fit the available evidence. We can speculate philosophically of course but we end up simply with opinions based on discussion. So, that may be a gateway to building a model but philosophy does not satisfy science for me.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 5:05:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Vince I believe you are remiss in not considering that philosophy is an integral part of science and there are areas where only philosophy will ever be able to speculate on the answers science may not be able to prove by experiment. In these cases without philosophy we could not even intelligently discuss them. As a practical matter, "science" seems to mean two different things these days. One the one hand, a method for investigating our world and following the evidence no matter where it leads, and on the other a determination to explain virtually everything we observe in purely physical terms. In my view, the second is nothing more or less than an attempt to enlist science as a proxy warrior for a philosophical assumption that has become enshrined as doctrine. K. I might agree, K, but I would need more specificity on the latter.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/25/2016 5:10:18 PM)
quote: That is a non-reply reply by you There was nothing to reply to. quote: I win. Sure, whatever makes you happy, here's a cookie as well. quote: Thanks for playing I wasn't playing, merely attempting to educate an ignoramus.

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 11:28:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. Exactly. Yes, exactly, and so it may be that humanity's widespread religious beliefs have arisen not so much from an analytical left-brained attempt to "explain" things as from an awareness (at some level) that our physical universe exists within an infinitely greater spiritual reality. That may, of course, be a non-falsifiable hypothesis, but then so is the hypothesis that science affords us the only way to truth. K.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 4:23:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: VincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. Exactly. Yes, exactly, and so it may be that humanity's widespread religious beliefs have arisen not so much from an analytical left-brained attempt to "explain" things as from an awareness (at some level) that our physical universe exists within an infinitely greater spiritual reality. That may, of course, be a non-falsifiable hypothesis, but then so is the hypothesis that science affords us the only way to truth. K. lol! Aren't you a rascal? By omitting my previous comment you change the meaning of our discourse from brain scans of comatose people to some spiritual vision you hold. So, no. I do not agree with your extended, twisted, desperate inference. Pretty feeble of you to play a trick like that. And grossly intellectually dishonest. I'm embarrassed for you stooping so low. But, thanks for the chuckle.[:D]

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 4:28:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: VincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. Exactly. Yes, exactly, and so it may be that humanity's widespread religious beliefs have arisen not so much from an analytical left-brained attempt to "explain" things as from an awareness (at some level) that our physical universe exists within an infinitely greater spiritual reality. That may, of course, be a non-falsifiable hypothesis, but then so is the hypothesis that science affords us the only way to truth. lol! Aren't you a rascal? By omitting my previous comment you change the meaning of our discourse from brain scans of comatose people to some spiritual vision you hold. So, no. I do not agree with your extended, twisted, desperate inference. Pretty feeble of you to play a trick like that. And grossly intellectually dishonest. I'm embarrassed for you stooping so low. But, thanks for the chuckle. Ah, but there was method to my madness. You asked for more specificity regarding a determination to explain virtually everything we observe in purely physical terms and to enlist science as a proxy warrior for a philosophical assumption that has become enshrined as doctrine. You are a case in point. K.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 4:38:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: VincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata At the risk of mutilating the English language, we're aware (at some level) of much more than we're conscious of. Exactly. Yes, exactly, and so it may be that humanity's widespread religious beliefs have arisen not so much from an analytical left-brained attempt to "explain" things as from an awareness (at some level) that our physical universe exists within an infinitely greater spiritual reality. That may, of course, be a non-falsifiable hypothesis, but then so is the hypothesis that science affords us the only way to truth. lol! Aren't you a rascal? By omitting my previous comment you change the meaning of our discourse from brain scans of comatose people to some spiritual vision you hold. So, no. I do not agree with your extended, twisted, desperate inference. Pretty feeble of you to play a trick like that. And grossly intellectually dishonest. I'm embarrassed for you stooping so low. But, thanks for the chuckle. Ah, but there was method to my madness. You asked for more specificity regarding a determination to explain virtually everything we observe in purely physical terms and to enlist science as a proxy warrior for a philosophical assumption that has become enshrined as doctrine. You are a case in point. K. Right. Weasel words. I made no comments of approval or disapproval on any philosophical assumption. All I have ever said was that science had limits and beyond the empirical method was naught but speculation. Otherwise you are trying to press upon me a position I never held. So, not madness but total intellectual dishonesty. How pathetic of you.

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 5:07:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML you are trying to press upon me a position I never held. Yeah, no. The tail I'm pinning on you is the same one you've always worn: the essence of science and its methods incorporate a paradigm of materialism, a judgment on the ultimate nature of reality is inherent within. Otherwise, one must make a new age, mystical leap from quantum physics to a non-materialist nature of reality. ~VincentML Well my goodness, we can't have that. We don't want science proving that materialism is bankrupt. But here's a news flash. The job of science is to discover the ultimate nature of reality, not assume it, and the saddest part is this whole sorry story is that you're a teacher, engaged in the business of infecting young minds with your anti-scientific crap. K.

vincentML -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 5:58:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML you are trying to press upon me a position I never held. Yeah, no. The tail I'm pinning on you is the same one you've always worn. since the essence of science and its methods incorporate a paradigm of materialism, a judgment on the ultimate nature of reality is inherent within. Otherwise, one must make a new age, mystical leap from quantum physics to a non-materialist nature of reality ~VincentML Well my goodness, we can't have that. We don't want science proving that materialism is bankrupt. But here's a news flash. The job of science is to discover the ultimate nature of reality, not assume it, and the saddest part is this whole sorry story is that you're a teacher, engaged in the business of infecting young minds with your anti-scientific crap. K. You assign to empiricism a greater power than I ever granted it. I do not share your optimism that science can discover the ultimate nature of reality. That's what you believe? Really? That's daft. Again you truncate my words and ideas, picking and choosing to suit your prejudice. Here is the entire quote, as you well know: I agree with what you say here. I always tried to point out to my students that there was no known hypothesis testing for the reality of God, without getting involved in the issues of lack of evidence being evidence. However, where we have a slight disagreement is that since the essence of science and its methods incorporate a paradigm of materialism, a judgment on the ultimate nature of reality is inherent within. Otherwise, one must make a new age, mystical leap from quantum physics to a non-materialist nature of reality. Understanding of course that many people use avenues other than science to make their judgments. What is your confusion? I'm talking about judgments here, not certainty. Do you wish to claim that empiricism can incorporate spiritualism? Should scientists gather and measure ghosts? How freakin weird is that? Very weird. I'll stand by what I have written. You can snip my words here and there to make them fit whatever makes you happy, but you flatter yourself if you think I give a shit about your beliefs.

Kirata -> RE: Let's try leaving religion out of it.... (6/26/2016 6:15:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Again you truncate my words and ideas, picking and choosing to suit your prejudice. Here is the entire quote, as you well know: Get a new violin. I linked to the source, what more do you want? Your operative claim is that the essence of science (and therefore its method) is a philosophical assumption. That's a church, not science. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Do you wish to claim that empiricism can incorporate spiritualism? Should scientists gather and measure ghosts? How freakin weird is that? Very weird. Yeah, but par for the course... you have a lot of weird ideas. K.

Page: << < prev 17 18 [19] 20 21 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875