The Future of Earth

Ladewig said:
Simply put: no. Science allows us to find new medicines. Science allows us to determine the efficiency (and possible dangers) of these new medicines through double blind testing.
Click to expand...


star.logic said:
Yes and other ways of viewing reality allow you to find other solutions, and alternative methods of reaching those solutions.

All the while, learning as you go along.
Click to expand...

As long as we are talking about medical issues, can you give an example of another way of viewing reality that produces another solution?
 
Gurdur said:
You've just introduced a value judgment into your very second sentence (there was also one in your first, but the second one is more glaring).

Care to lay out exactly you believe to be "proper science"?

Because as soon as you actually start doing that, it will illustrate many of the problems and the premises you are using.

Certainly. :) We'll start with your belief as to what constitutes "proper science".
Click to expand...

Pretty straight forward, I believe in science that is based on the Scientific Method -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

How about we simply drop the rhetoric and move along?

Bettter still overall is any good postgrad course in the philosophy of science at any good uni, but the essentials are easily covered.

Infinite regress: the problem that all human perception is subjective, meaning that all human judgments and POV's -- all --- are subjective. There is no such thing as truly objective knowledge which stands outside the observed universe. This then means that in any chain of reasoning, in any chain of perception on which reasoning is based, there must eventually come a point either where it degrades to a circular argument, or it goes on in an infinite regress of believed causal progession.

That will be seen, seriously, as you go along the definition of "proper" science here; the endless chain or the circularity of argument will be seen.

Science attempts to get over that problem by intersubjectivity, that is, shared observation, but it is still a problem at times.


And a paranoid believes there is a conspiracy against him.

Your own belief is more justifiable (where justification rests on value judgments, and value judgments are by their nature not part of science :D) than the paranoid's; but it rests on various beliefs, such as the belief that shared observation is a good thing, and using human-made measurements such as Fahrenheit and Celsus.

Oddly enough that is something almost everyone believes. And yet they disagree so much.

A tool is the result of working premises.
Click to expand...

In respect to the bold-ed sentence, I'll do so, to the best of my ability :)

I agree that there are no absolutes as far as we can determine. But I think that for all practical purposes we are able to determine most things to a high enough degree of certainty that to not believe them would be foolish.

Human-made measurements are of course simply another set of tools that aid us in sharing information. While they might not be accurate in reference to some standard from some other world or universe, they allow us earthlings to gain knowledge in terms that we can all understand (well, unless you use the metric system, then I'm lost ;). Until we find some external reference to use, I think they work pretty good at providing a system of information sharing that more than adequately covers all practical applications (how far is it from my house to the store, at what predicted temperature should I bring the dog in, how thick should the uranium rods be in a reactor vessel to generate enough heat to provide enough steam to generate a given amount of electricity, things like that).

Can you provide an example of where your definition of Infinite Regress (which is different from the one in the Wiki) would likely have a practical impact on me, or anyone else not involved in philosophy or theoretical physics?

I guess what I'm getting at is that I consider most of your points, while true, to not be of any practical importance to most of us humans, on earth :)

If I know that water freezes at the human made measurement of 32 degrees F, and the weather man says it's going to get down to 20 degrees F tonight, I know that's cold! That's good enough for me:)
 
star.logic said:
Yes and other ways of viewing reality allow you to find other solutions, and alternative methods of reaching those solutions.
Click to expand...

Examples please.

All the while, learning as you go along.

Many things are not yet clear, in every aspect, we still have unclarities.

This would be correct if the beliefs in question are unfounded.

But there are unfounded scientific beliefs, as well as other types of beliefs that are unfounded.
Click to expand...

Examples please.

As well as the opposite.

Yes, but that's only true because there are things that science *IS* applicable, it just doesn't cover anything, science is highly valuable, knowledge is science.

This may be, but there currently exists a connection to all things human, including the future of humanity.

You have died before?

You may not see them, yet you are impacting their creation, albiet, you could argue in a small way, yet it still counts and you still have a duty to withstand. As a human, you should help create a more positive future for those that ARE going to experience it, even if you believe you aren't.

Yes, that's good too, but there is only so much about today to worry about, while down the line, things could get pretty ugly if we're not thinking about the future.

I'm being general, the world is made of many people with different beliefs.

Beliefs are applicable to certain situations, if you can decide which situations require which beliefs or methods of viewing reality, then your reality will become very clear. No one belief of this planet has the entirety of our situation held within it, they are all parts of the picture, with billions and billions of parts.
Click to expand...

Please provide some examples for comparison.

That's more specific, so I'll leave that up to you.

Which is why we must find the middle ground.

Imagine if we could realize unity between all our beliefs. Not because they are all TRUE, as we see them. Yet because they all, in their own way, define the same thing. This planet, this reality, this universe.
Click to expand...
 
Gurdur said:
Actually, it is.
Or better said, certain ground premises are essential to science, and those premises cannot be proven any further (given the problem of infinite regress etc.).

Trying to smack around belief systems simply because they are belief systems won't earn you a nickel; every POV in life must rest at some point on a belief system, a system of premises.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I disagree. Chemical reactions will happen whether anyone believes in them or not. If everyone stops believing in Christianity tomorrow morning, it will cease to exist and become myth.

There - that earned me a dime.
 
This Guy said:
Pretty straight forward, I believe in science that is based on the Scientific Method -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method




I guess what I'm getting at is that I consider most of your points, while true, to not be of any practical importance to most of us humans, on earth :)

If I know that water freezes at the human made measurement of 32 degrees F, and the weather man says it's going to get down to 20 degrees F tonight, I know that's cold! That's good enough for me:)
Click to expand...

Like all philosophy, what they primarily are are word games and thought tricks
that may be interesting but have no actual validity. Measurements are measurements and whether we are actually in a dream state, an alternate universe, the mind or dreams of god makes not a bit of difference. We can only evaluate what seems real to us and use the tools we have to make those evaluations - and science is our pre-eminent tool for that purpose.:D
 
fuelair said:
Like all philosophy, what they primarily are are word games and thought tricks
that may be interesting but have no actual validity. Measurements are measurements and whether we are actually in a dream state, an alternate universe, the mind or dreams of god makes not a bit of difference. We can only evaluate what seems real to us and use the tools we have to make those evaluations - and science is our pre-eminent tool for that purpose.:D
Click to expand...

:D

Philosophy is fine. We used to have a lot of philosophical discussions while sitting on a mid watch on patrol on the Subs. During some of those 6 hour periods, we solved many of the worlds toughest questions! Of course, by the time we slept and came back on watch, we'd forgotten the answers.

Over the years I've determined that I do better at philosophical discussions after I've had a few drinks ;)


I did make an oops in my reply. I stated I believe in science that is based on the scientific method. I meant I believe in the results of research that follows the scientific method. Of course, peer review is a vital part of that process IMHO.
 
Wow, every time I step into this thread, I swear, I smell patchouli. And illegal substances. Seriously.

What I was saying with my "What should we believe?" post is that there IS no middle ground.

As much as I despise typing about religion, I'm going to take this moment to.

Religion is incredibly important to the religious. Incredibly. It's a defining personality aspect.

So how about this... Christians believe in one God, Hindus believe in many. Muslims believe in prophets that talk to God, but not a son of God. Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus is the earthly form of the Archangel Michael. They also think Jesus was impaled and not crucified. Muslims recognize Christ, but only as a prophet. Mormons believe that it's possible to become godlike.

If you think anyone is going to reach a middle ground on that, then you are... I won't say crazy. I will say "naive," "unrealistic," and "hoping beyond reason."
 
The alternate universe with the Evil Kirk and the Spock with the fake beard.
 
star.logic said:
What do you think our future holds?
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about yours, but my future holds a nice vindaloo and a large glass of Belgian ale. Unfortunately, it also holds a h3ll of a lot more sitting around the office doing more of the same BS i do every day before it gets to the curry and beer.
 
Ladewig said:
As long as we are talking about medical issues, can you give an example of another way of viewing reality that produces another solution?
Click to expand...

Any medical issue has it's own way of being cured, using different methods.




RemieV said:
Wow, every time I step into this thread, I swear, I smell patchouli. And illegal substances. Seriously.
Click to expand...
[/b]

Blow your nose maybe????


What I was saying with my "What should we believe?" post is that there IS no middle ground.
Click to expand...


The middle ground is a combination of both of the items, a perfect balance so that, as a result, the remaining "whole" composed of the two original aspects is neither one original aspect or the other, but an entirely new aspect. This is the middle ground, and it is reached with an accepting of both direction of views that exist, so that one neither becomes obsessed with one or the other causing them to have an imbalanced view.

Both directions exist, in this case material science and it's opposing views, and they are only parts of the complete understanding. The aspects or belief systems to either end of the "middle ground", overly to one side, will be imbalanced. Both aspects are equally represented by human life and belief, so becoming obsessed with either side will only give one the understanding of half of the experience that, as a whole, man partakes in.

In this case those who believe overly to science, miss what other belief systems hold, while those in these other belief systems, while disregarding science, are missing what science holds.

Both sides are required, not all belief systems.

On of the extremes in this case is represented by science, a highly materialistic belief system, it is not representing the scientific method, but just what science, as a whole, has shaped out of our reality.

As much as I despise typing about religion, I'm going to take this moment to.
Click to expand...

This is an example of rejecting one part of the picture, while taking overly to another part.

Religion is incredibly important to the religious. Incredibly. It's a defining personality aspect.
Click to expand...

As are the incredibly scientific.

So how about this... Christians believe in one God, Hindus believe in many. Muslims believe in prophets that talk to God, but not a son of God. Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus is the earthly form of the Archangel Michael. They also think Jesus was impaled and not crucified. Muslims recognize Christ, but only as a prophet. Mormons believe that it's possible to become godlike.
Click to expand...

Many beliefs are different.

If you think anyone is going to reach a middle ground on that, then you are... I won't say crazy. I will say "naive," "unrealistic," and "hoping beyond reason."
Click to expand...

The middle ground is a representative of all beliefs, not only the sum of religious beliefs, but scientific or otherwise beliefs.

Combing all of religion would be a partial task compared to combining all experiential knowledge currently being expressed on this planet, which would be a much more integrating experience.

Loss Leader said:
What dual existence?
Click to expand...

There are many existing ways of experiencing reality on the planet. These are thought of as personalities, or belief systems or usually with one causing the other. All are human created methods of viewing reality, and are thus justified by human experience.

These all have representations which inadvertently show up in our lives.

The reaction you give to the presence of these objects or situations in your life will ultimately determine what you chose to be there, and why, which is most important, and what kind of decision maker you are.

This value on of yourself is devoid of any object, as it is what causes all objects to come into your life, the personality. Now, there are those that treat the personality as if it is an object, and there are those that treat the personality as if it is something else.

So according there are residing objective ways of perceiving reality, and there is an equal but opposite subjective, way.

These are the dualities of man.

Instead of seeing both object and otherwise, or objective and subjective, man as a whole, can only see one or the others. We have a partial ability to fully accept the reality we have created for ourselves. This causes a duality, as well as is the duality, it can be represented physically, as an imblance in one or more systems. The systems may be physical, or mental, digestive, or emotional, or whichever exist, because they will all be affected.

The current state of our race on this planet, as a whole, is represented by this sytsem of duality. As a whole, there is no agreement between either sides of personality. A sort of problematic situation when nuclear devices, food systems, and war gets involved, for the entire species development.

These dualities currently exist in all life on earth, to different degrees.


fullair said:
I think he/she meant dual carburators or dueling pistols, but there must be somes universe where it is correct.:D :jaw-dropp :D
Click to expand...

Thank you for attempting translation, but this is not what I meant.
 
Ladewig said:
As long as we are talking about medical issues, can you give an example of another way of viewing reality that produces another solution?
Click to expand...


star.logic said:
Any medical issue has it's own way of being cured, using different methods.
Click to expand...

Oh, what the heck, I'll ask nicely one more time. Can you provide a specific example of what you mean?
 
fuelair said:
Why no, no he/she can't.
Click to expand...

Star Logic, if you really want to be taken seriously, and have a worthwhile discussion, you really need to use less generalities, and more specifics.

Give us some actual examples in plain English, that we can discuss. Then we will all be able to form opinions/offer a critique of what your claiming.

Otherwise, I think it's safe to say, most of the posters here will consider you just spinning your wheels, and wasting time.

While many posters here can be blunt and to the point, I've not yet heard of any of them biting anyone for expressing a point of view or belief :)
 
I asked "What dual existence?" and you answered:

star.logic said:
There are many existing ways of experiencing reality on the planet. These are thought of as personalities, or belief systems or usually with one causing the other. All are human created methods of viewing reality, and are thus justified by human experience.

These all have representations which inadvertently show up in our lives.

The reaction you give to the presence of these objects or situations in your life will ultimately determine what you chose to be there, and why, which is most important, and what kind of decision maker you are.

This value on of yourself is devoid of any object, as it is what causes all objects to come into your life, the personality. Now, there are those that treat the personality as if it is an object, and there are those that treat the personality as if it is something else.

So according there are residing objective ways of perceiving reality, and there is an equal but opposite subjective, way.

These are the dualities of man.
Click to expand...

So, first of all, most of that made no sense.

Second, you state that objective reality is "equal but opposite" to one's subjective experience. I subjectively experience the sun being the size of a quarter. How is that equal to the sun objectively being 870,000 miles across? How is the objective reality of a Ford Fiesta opposite of the subjective beliefs about a Ford Fiesta?

Assuming that this duality exists, what is the value of reconciling them? Consider this:

I went to Disneyworld when I was 9 and I have a subjective memory of where the different rides were located in the park. If I go back to Disneyworld today, they will have a map that differs significantly from my memory (if only because they've opened some new rides since 1979 but for other reasons as well). Which should I do: 1) Ignore the map and follow my memory; 2) Ignore my memory and follow the map; or 3) sit down and create a new picture that is half-map/half-memory?

If you said I should do anything other than 2, you have doomed me to a very frustrating day at the amusement park.

My point is that we all live our lives according to a map - a construct of how the world works that we store in our head. The more realistic our construct is, the better we will navigate through life. What is the value of giving heed to anything but the most accurate, objective information that exists?

P.S. I hear they opened something called Epcot in 1982. Am I safe just ignoring it?
 
This Guy said:
Otherwise, I think it's safe to say, most of the posters here will consider you just spinning your wheels, and wasting time.
Click to expand...
[/b]

Please be kind and respect my views, and I will always respect yours.

If you wish to learn from me, you'll have to allow me to time to "speak".


While many posters here can be blunt and to the point, I've not yet heard of any of them biting anyone for expressing a point of view or belief :)
Click to expand...


I would hope no one is harmed for expressing a belief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom