philosophy is the only path to truth, regardless of any midwit faux-intellectualism
empirical science cannot explain, only model and predict
to truly understand existence requires philosophy
There is nothing in philosophy that has not yet been falsified by quantitative behavioural science. It’s prominence in the 19-20th centuries was merely an artifact of prevention of empirical scientific investigation by the church.
your statement doesn't even make sense. "quantitative behavior science" is nothing but statistics and vague generalizations. doesn't really relate to philosophy, let alone "falsify" it.
this post reads like someone who was told "science has made everything else obsolete" and then just accepted it without bothering to put a second of thought into why and how. you're just parroting.
I didn't say that I don't like philosophy, midwit. I just said that I don't find those particular arguments convincing. There are philosophical arguments that I have found convincing in the past.
Science doesn’t require belief. Only supernaturalism does. Abrahamism is a Middle-Eastern supernatural mysticist cult created by Northern Semites in order to promote sedition against European Roman aristocracy by false promise of freedom responsibility to the underclasses, slaves, women, and children. Which is why it appeals to you.
Science is not based on dogma. There is no "Pope of Science" there is no "God of Science" and there is no "Church of Science". Science is just the practice of gathering empirical evidence about the natural world through forming hypothesies and conducting experiments. Its a set of practices, but its hardly dogmatic.
Wrong by definition since it requires a warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. Anything else is not scientific regardless of who claims it is.
Ironically enough the current postmodernist/wokeism paradigm is simply another derivative of the Abrahamic method of institutionalised lying - pseudoscientific and supernatural nonsense by false promise of freedom from the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe. First by Semites destroying Rome, then again by them migration to the US post-WW2 and infiltrating the academy, and now again they are attempting to destroy western civilization and drag into another dark age for the third time through the false promise of freedom from responsibility and productivity. There’s no difference between Abrahamism/Marxism/Wokeism.
"reality is real" is dogma, morons. science is dogmatic assumptions all the way down. any time science claims to know or describe something about the universe, the argument can be reduced to a dogmatic assumption. all it can do is predict and model the behavior of your own perception.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>all it can do is predict and model the behavior of your own perception.
Thats wrong. The entire point is to ensure the results of scientific study and experimentation is the same for every single observer and there are no more confounding variables. Thats how we are able to determine if a natural phenomenon is fundamental to begin with.It has nothing to do with individual persception, that would be unscintific in fact. If you want to argue from a solipsist perspective and make the assertion that reality itself is subjective, then nothing is fundamental, including your religion.
8 months ago
Anonymous
fricking dense.
the results of a study being consistently the same or whatever doesn't prove anything about the nature of what's being studied, it just allows you to model expected results. you can't determine any natural phenomenon is fundamental - you can boil water billions of times but all that proves is that there's a near 100% statistical likelihood of water boiling in X conditions. it doesn't tell you anything about how the forces that govern it function or exist. zoom in your electron microscopes as far as you want but you'll never know what exactly substance is, or why there is substance instead of nothingness.
8 months ago
Anonymous
You wont see God either
8 months ago
Anonymous
religion doesn't base itself in needing to be proved, nor does it claim to be provable. it's metaphysics. the truth is in belief.
empirical science on the other hand claims to hold the key to objective truth, which is simply wrong - it can only find "truths" within its own system, much like math only holds true within a dogmatically constructed mathematical system. if you reject the precept that 1+1=2 than the entire system crumbles, because the entire thing is defined on axioms and recursions.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>if you don't believe in science then it won't work
in that case go jump off a building and not believe in gravity
8 months ago
Anonymous
being purposefully obtuse is not an argument.
gravity is not "science" - it is a natural force of the universe. "science" refers to the attempt to explain said forces.
8 months ago
Anonymous
neither is your argument of how science is fake because your autism philosophy says so, especially when said sciences is used to measure shit like gravity, along with proving how their methods work, which you ignore or more likely don't know how it works since you just enjoy the false sense of superiority, problem is nobody buys your shit beyond other morons
8 months ago
Anonymous
measuring gravity is one thing. explaining it is another. talk all you want about how some boffins recently detected gravity waves but that's just detection - you cannot explain what a gravity wave actually *is*. it's just more terminology and measurement slapped onto a vague concept you think exists.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>you can't explain it
except they can, and are more than happy to explain it to you if you just ask, which you don't since it would ruin your argument, or more likely go over your head
8 months ago
Anonymous
explain what a gravity wave fundamentally is.
8 months ago
Anonymous
you mean the one that happens in liquids
8 months ago
Anonymous
NTA but I'll take a crack at it
Time changes relative to you near massive objects. The reason time is relative is because the universe has a speed limit (c) whic means time itself can only go so fast, and the higher your velocity, the slower that speed is relative to you. Massive objects like stars and planets will naturally experience the effects of this fundamental limit the most, so when they move or oscillate, the rate of time relative to it, surrounding it, will also change, causing gravitational waves, as the rate of time is stretched and compressed, so is space, as space and time are more or less the same thing. I can go on and on about how we know this is the case but there's only so much space and time on IQfy itself
8 months ago
Anonymous
>it's metaphysics. the truth is in belief
I hate you frickers for trying to redefine metaphysics.
We have different definitions of science. To us normal people. Science is just a word to describe a mechanical process or descriptive analysis of something that works and is reproducible. For you it's some kind of "force" and "body" and ideology.
Wrong by definition since it requires a warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. Anything else is not scientific regardless of who claims it is.
Ironically enough the current postmodernist/wokeism paradigm is simply another derivative of the Abrahamic method of institutionalised lying - pseudoscientific and supernatural nonsense by false promise of freedom from the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe. First by Semites destroying Rome, then again by them migration to the US post-WW2 and infiltrating the academy, and now again they are attempting to destroy western civilization and drag into another dark age for the third time through the false promise of freedom from responsibility and productivity. There’s no difference between Abrahamism/Marxism/Wokeism.
That’s what you invented. There’s 0 difference between wokeism and abrahamism - both institutionalised pilpul and dogma. Abrahamism is the origin of lying.
>ignore the reproduction crisis! That’s not really true
8 months ago
Anonymous
> I can't breed! > this is somehow sciencific problem
incels, please
8 months ago
Anonymous
Almost entirely restricted to oncology and soft sciences. There’s no replication crisis (the actual term you were looking for) in physics, chemistry and biology. Those fields are all solid.
It is, when the people rallying against it aren't exactly backing their stuff with reproductible evidence of their own, or making their own independent studies using actual data.
Some people don't get the difference between the scientific method and the religious method. The first thing is physics stuff. Things were you can build a model of to be able to produce stuff and heal people. The religious method is about metaphysics. Things that are beyond the laws of nature.
They just use the word to complain about science. Science refutes their LARPing fantasy escapism Christianity game they play with life so it makes them very uncomfortable and angry.
It isn’t. Science is literally everything.
Oh my science!!
Science save me!
He writes the songs that the whole world sings.
What about disbelief due to a lack of scientific evidence plus the fact that I don't find the philosophical arguments convincing?
philosophy is the only path to truth, regardless of any midwit faux-intellectualism
empirical science cannot explain, only model and predict
to truly understand existence requires philosophy
There is nothing in philosophy that has not yet been falsified by quantitative behavioural science. It’s prominence in the 19-20th centuries was merely an artifact of prevention of empirical scientific investigation by the church.
your statement doesn't even make sense. "quantitative behavior science" is nothing but statistics and vague generalizations. doesn't really relate to philosophy, let alone "falsify" it.
this post reads like someone who was told "science has made everything else obsolete" and then just accepted it without bothering to put a second of thought into why and how. you're just parroting.
I didn't say that I don't like philosophy, midwit. I just said that I don't find those particular arguments convincing. There are philosophical arguments that I have found convincing in the past.
Philosphy is the embodiment of faux-intellectualism thoughever
>t. filtered by calculus II
Science doesn’t require belief. Only supernaturalism does. Abrahamism is a Middle-Eastern supernatural mysticist cult created by Northern Semites in order to promote sedition against European Roman aristocracy by false promise of freedom responsibility to the underclasses, slaves, women, and children. Which is why it appeals to you.
>Science doesn’t require belief
blatantly false, science is founded on dogma in exactly the same way religion is
Science is not based on dogma. There is no "Pope of Science" there is no "God of Science" and there is no "Church of Science". Science is just the practice of gathering empirical evidence about the natural world through forming hypothesies and conducting experiments. Its a set of practices, but its hardly dogmatic.
"reality is real" is dogma, morons. science is dogmatic assumptions all the way down. any time science claims to know or describe something about the universe, the argument can be reduced to a dogmatic assumption. all it can do is predict and model the behavior of your own perception.
>all it can do is predict and model the behavior of your own perception.
Thats wrong. The entire point is to ensure the results of scientific study and experimentation is the same for every single observer and there are no more confounding variables. Thats how we are able to determine if a natural phenomenon is fundamental to begin with.It has nothing to do with individual persception, that would be unscintific in fact. If you want to argue from a solipsist perspective and make the assertion that reality itself is subjective, then nothing is fundamental, including your religion.
fricking dense.
the results of a study being consistently the same or whatever doesn't prove anything about the nature of what's being studied, it just allows you to model expected results. you can't determine any natural phenomenon is fundamental - you can boil water billions of times but all that proves is that there's a near 100% statistical likelihood of water boiling in X conditions. it doesn't tell you anything about how the forces that govern it function or exist. zoom in your electron microscopes as far as you want but you'll never know what exactly substance is, or why there is substance instead of nothingness.
You wont see God either
religion doesn't base itself in needing to be proved, nor does it claim to be provable. it's metaphysics. the truth is in belief.
empirical science on the other hand claims to hold the key to objective truth, which is simply wrong - it can only find "truths" within its own system, much like math only holds true within a dogmatically constructed mathematical system. if you reject the precept that 1+1=2 than the entire system crumbles, because the entire thing is defined on axioms and recursions.
>if you don't believe in science then it won't work
in that case go jump off a building and not believe in gravity
being purposefully obtuse is not an argument.
gravity is not "science" - it is a natural force of the universe. "science" refers to the attempt to explain said forces.
neither is your argument of how science is fake because your autism philosophy says so, especially when said sciences is used to measure shit like gravity, along with proving how their methods work, which you ignore or more likely don't know how it works since you just enjoy the false sense of superiority, problem is nobody buys your shit beyond other morons
measuring gravity is one thing. explaining it is another. talk all you want about how some boffins recently detected gravity waves but that's just detection - you cannot explain what a gravity wave actually *is*. it's just more terminology and measurement slapped onto a vague concept you think exists.
>you can't explain it
except they can, and are more than happy to explain it to you if you just ask, which you don't since it would ruin your argument, or more likely go over your head
explain what a gravity wave fundamentally is.
you mean the one that happens in liquids
NTA but I'll take a crack at it
Time changes relative to you near massive objects. The reason time is relative is because the universe has a speed limit (c) whic means time itself can only go so fast, and the higher your velocity, the slower that speed is relative to you. Massive objects like stars and planets will naturally experience the effects of this fundamental limit the most, so when they move or oscillate, the rate of time relative to it, surrounding it, will also change, causing gravitational waves, as the rate of time is stretched and compressed, so is space, as space and time are more or less the same thing. I can go on and on about how we know this is the case but there's only so much space and time on IQfy itself
>it's metaphysics. the truth is in belief
I hate you frickers for trying to redefine metaphysics.
We have different definitions of science. To us normal people. Science is just a word to describe a mechanical process or descriptive analysis of something that works and is reproducible. For you it's some kind of "force" and "body" and ideology.
Wrong by definition since it requires a warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. Anything else is not scientific regardless of who claims it is.
Ironically enough the current postmodernist/wokeism paradigm is simply another derivative of the Abrahamic method of institutionalised lying - pseudoscientific and supernatural nonsense by false promise of freedom from the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe. First by Semites destroying Rome, then again by them migration to the US post-WW2 and infiltrating the academy, and now again they are attempting to destroy western civilization and drag into another dark age for the third time through the false promise of freedom from responsibility and productivity. There’s no difference between Abrahamism/Marxism/Wokeism.
dogma is not the same thing as axioms
>Trust the science!!! You can't critizice the science!!!!
That’s what you invented. There’s 0 difference between wokeism and abrahamism - both institutionalised pilpul and dogma. Abrahamism is the origin of lying.
Who brought up abrahamism? we are talking about our lord and saviour SCIENCE!!!
>You can't critizice the science!!!!
What is the peer review
>ignore the reproduction crisis! That’s not really true
> I can't breed!
> this is somehow sciencific problem
incels, please
Almost entirely restricted to oncology and soft sciences. There’s no replication crisis (the actual term you were looking for) in physics, chemistry and biology. Those fields are all solid.
It is, when the people rallying against it aren't exactly backing their stuff with reproductible evidence of their own, or making their own independent studies using actual data.
Some people don't get the difference between the scientific method and the religious method. The first thing is physics stuff. Things were you can build a model of to be able to produce stuff and heal people. The religious method is about metaphysics. Things that are beyond the laws of nature.
Tells you all you need to know that op is mocking the idea of deferring to tools of objective measurement to answer questions.
I mean what an image
It's the conservative version of body positive feminists that smash scales so they can't weigh themselves.
Great analogy, same mindset.
>science is le religion
How daring
Why are people here constantly whining about "scientism" yet never make a coherent argument against it?
Because "scientism" is whatever they don't like
They just use the word to complain about science. Science refutes their LARPing fantasy escapism Christianity game they play with life so it makes them very uncomfortable and angry.
Doesn't have to be scientific; just predictive.
does prayer have predictive power? does astrology? witchcraft?
Why did you assume they don't? Have you tested them?
>disbelief
I think you mean skepticism.
Most religions make empirical claims so they fall under the purview of science.
Funny how you never see atheists try to insult religion by calling it scientific or logical