SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PastimesThe Philosopher's Thread


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: koan who wrote (2)12/13/2008 10:50:28 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™
3 Recommendations   of 71
 
How do you know that what you claim to know is true, since your perceptions of the external world is subjective and phenomenological and specifically tailored only to your own singular observations?

GZ

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (3)12/13/2008 11:42:17 AM
From: koan
   of 71
 
I don't feel I know much of anything really. But that is the human condition. So we try to understand as much as we can.

And because we know the mind fools itself and Gestalt's reality to a such a great degree, science has really been a huge help to humans. Science is what pulled us out of the "dark ages" as it provided us with objective truth for the first time in man's history using the inductive method.

E.G. we do know that Einsteins theory of relativity works as we have built atomic bombs based on the theory.

We now also know we evolved from primates as we have both anthropological and DNA evidence.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: koan who wrote (4)12/13/2008 4:04:31 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™
2 Recommendations   of 71
 
we try to understand as much as we can.

But, how can we claim to know anything if we know nothing for certain? I refer to you Socrates...

"The only thing I know for certain is that I know nothing for certain."

- - Socrates

And because we know the mind fools itself

How do you know we have a "mind" at all? Maybe we only think we do, and this "thinking" is merely an autonomic nervous response that gives us the illusion that we think at all?

science has really been a huge help to humans. Science is what pulled us out of the "dark ages" as it provided us with objective truth for the first time in man's history using the inductive method.

Science is also just another religion. You believe in it, or you don't. You put your trust and faith in it, or you don't. You can use science to guide you through life, or you don't. That is how all religions are used. You mention the inductive method. Inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning have been around long before "science" arrived along with its scientific method. Aristotelian logic is as ancient as the hills.

Einsteins theory of relativity works as we have built atomic bombs based on the theory.

Einstein's theory of special relativity also includes dimensions or reality which we cannot observe, i.e., there are dimensions beyond the four we can observe.

We now also know we evolved from primates as we have both anthropological and DNA evidence.

We cannot know anything for certain, therefore we do not know anything about ourselves and/or our origins.

You refer to the universe as if there is only one universe. There are an infinite number of universes beginning and disappearing all the time as part of the fabric of space, according to the most recent views by university and NASA space scientists.

GZ

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (5)12/13/2008 4:44:04 PM
From: koan
   of 71
 
I agree with most of what you say. And I believe in quantum pjysics multiverse theory of parallel universes and think the universe is infinite.

And I believe: "reality is an illlusion so highly established it takes on the form of a massive hallucination"

>>
Science is also just another religion. You believe in it, or you don't. You put your trust and faith in it, or you don't. You can use science to guide you through life, or you don't. That is how all religions are used. You mention the inductive method. Inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning have been around long before "science" arrived along with its scientific method. Aristotelian logic is as ancient as the hills.<<

With science I can test and idea. with religion one cannot test it.

That is a pretty big difference!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (5)12/13/2008 4:54:44 PM
From: koan
   of 71
 
Mandelbrot set. Ever see this?

It is very good, and fun to watch. Watch all 6 episodes. Mandelbrot discovered Chaos theory and fractals in 1980. Fractals are like magic and the door to infinity. Great music, narration and visuals.

Very trippy!!

youtube.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: koan12/13/2008 5:26:54 PM
   of 71
 
We all only have a part of the elephant. We must compare ideas to see the whole elephant.

Here is what I would hope for. People who have strong ideas they have spent a lifetime working on, to present those ideas, but with a a first goal, being knowledge. To learn, and replace the idea if it has logical or factual flaws.

Present ideas, as powerful as possible, but do everything in ones powerr to remain objective, that way we all learn and if the idea is wrong one can imporve their thinking.

Who wants an idea that is wrong or bad?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: koan who wrote (6)12/13/2008 6:13:13 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™
3 Recommendations   of 71
 
With science I can test and idea. with religion one cannot test it.

But, you are not correct. Religious teachings can easily be tested if you know how to test them.

GZ

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (9)12/14/2008 5:15:22 AM
From: koan
   of 71
 
>>
With science I can test and idea. with religion one cannot test it.

But, you are not correct. Religious teachings can easily be tested if you know how to test them.<<

And how would one do that exactly?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: koan who wrote (10)12/14/2008 5:43:02 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™
3 Recommendations   of 71
 
And how would one do that exactly?

It's very easy... just look at all the laws that society around the world has on the books, both civil and criminal, these laws support religious teachings...

The most difficult thing for people to notice is the obvious... and because it is so obvious, we tend to ignore it and not even see it, we tend to take it for granted...

But, for starters, there are laws in our society against robbery, against murder, and so on... also, if you're married, then try to have an extramarital affair and see what it does to your marriage... and we all know how greed can destroy your life, just take a look at the corruption in Washington, or the ponzi scheme just unfolding by the head of the NAZ exchange... I could go on, but for a simple response to your query, all our modern day civil and criminal laws support and enforce the ten Commandments in one way or another... unless you would suggest that these Commandments do not represent the basis for all religious teachings, then the warnings explicitly stated in those Commandments are religious teachings that can very easily be tested, violate any one of them and see what it does to your life... you can name any credible religion worldwide and you will find the same Commandments woven into that religion's teachings...

GZ

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (11)12/14/2008 11:17:07 AM
From: koan
   of 71
 
There is no use in debating the existence of any of the 5,000+ religions, as there is no direct evidence that any of the multitude of gods is real, which would be accepted by the scientific community.

Absent any evidence, or even logic, debate about religion becomes just a simple argument. Which is senseless and a waste of time. Nothing is ever learned.

One cannot say we have laws, therefore god exists. In economics they have a saying for making a connection like that. It is the fallacy of "Post hoc ergo proptor hoc" -translated: "that is, therefore because of this".

Primates have laws, all ancient tribes had laws, the ancient Greeks 350 BC, spent zillions of hours discussing all sorts of laws and even democracy and they were not very religious. In fact Plato said: "for those who cannot understand, let them count beads".

On the other hand there is tons of direct scientific evidence of our evolution from primates.

I will not debate religion absent evidence. I believe religion was thought up before we had science, and we did not understand the world very well.

In fact I am surprised at how many educated people still believe in something which cannot be proved.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10