+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 121 to 127 of 127

Thread: Real Science making a comeback!

  1. #121
    Champ JuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond reputeJuBru has a reputation beyond repute JuBru's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tech
    Posts
    17,489

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!

    Of course everyone has heard of Bigfoot.



    Never liked the 1974 Ford F-250. But at least this one redeemed the model slightly by crushing things.
    Liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as by the abuses of power. ~James Madison

    I like me.

    It's a mockery.

  2. #122
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    23,907

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!

    Crickets....

    The silence of the evolutionists speaks volumes.

  3. #123
    Dawg Adamant Argument Czar Guisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond repute Guisslapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In your mind and under your skin
    Posts
    16,043

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!

    Did you say something that someone was supposed to respond to?

  4. #124
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    23,907

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!


  5. #125
    Champ detltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond reputedetltu has a reputation beyond repute detltu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    4,361

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guisslapp View Post
    Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that deals with knowledge. Many thinkers have said many different things over time regarding how we sort out what we know, so if you have interest in the subject that is a good jumping off point into that abyss. You could get lost and found a hundred different times and ways in there.

    You can follow the path of relativism, skepticism, nihilism, subjectivism, objectivism and everything in between - all of which can be consistent within their own view.

    For me knowledge has value if it is useful. Epistemological relatavism and nihilism - even if they are logically defensible are not very useful. The fact that they are concerned with being logically defensible is also their inherent weakness, they still want to be judged on some objective criteria. Actually - it is not the ideas themselves but that is a reflection upon how our consciousness is well adapted to gain knowledge through reason.

    The branch of philosophy that is concerned with the nature of reality is metaphysics. So you can see that epistemology and metaphysics are related because presumably epistemology should provide a basis for understanding metaphysics.

    So you could take a nihilist or relativist approach and say that reality is not truly knowable and that might be all well and good, academically, but that is a horribly useless philosophy. Sure you can geek out on message boards about it, but it will not aid you in life as far as I can tell.

    Similarly you can throw into question every sensory observation you have ever made as being a possible hallucination or unreliable indicator of the metaphysical world and that leads down the same nihilistic paths.

    If the only way you can attack an idea is by pursuing one of these strategies of nihilism or subjectivism, you are simply shifting the debate to the forum of where nothing is knowable.

    When we are talking about a concept like evolution or gravity - neither of these concepts are things that you see (they are not precepts). We observe their effect. Same thing with addition. It is a concept. Does that make these less valid or reliable than percepts (which one could also argue are also nothing more than our brains conceptualization of the more digital signals that our sense organs send the brain)?

    So evolution is just a concept that is based on other concepts. In that way it is no different than other things that we know - if I can validate a concept because of other concepts I know to be valid from my experience - objectively, it is rational to accept that concept in the context for which it is known.
    With the board going down and life getting in the way I never followed up on this discussion and I apologize. I have lost some interest but I feel a response is warranted.

    I wasn't trying to go full matrix on you, although I can see were you would make that mistake.

    You call faith an act of irrationality. I'm simply asking for what the qualification is for determining if something is irrational or not. You yourself believe in a lot of things you have not personally experienced or verified. And they don't all fit your "useful" criteria.
    Dawg80 believes in Bigfoot apparently. I am very skeptical. If I find myself out In the woods face to face with Bigfoot I will become one of the crazies in your eyes. It won't change weather or not Bigfoot exists. It wouldn't be useful to me as it would actually ruin my credibility. It also wouldn't change your mind as I'm already a "religionist".

  6. #126
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    23,907

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!

    Apparently, you don't know what you're talking about. Bigfoot = evolution in my opinion. I acknowledge it is possible both are real, but neither has been proven to exist. One thing Bigfoot has going for it, that evolution doesn't, at least there are people willing to count themselves as witnesses to Bigfoot. No one has witnessed a horse becoming a whale.

    Believers of both utilize elements of science to try to prove the existence of it. On that show "Finding Bigfoot" they use all kinds of technology to gather evidence, and reasoning to analyze it. They even have a resident skeptic (Reneae) who questions everything and everyone.

    But, if one is to accept evolution is real, then Bigfoot has to be accepted too, and placed somewhere in the "evolutionary tree." So, in trying to be a good sport and show support for the zealots, I asked the experts, the evolutionists, where BF fits. I am disappointed none have addressed my sincere question.

  7. #127
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    23,907

    Re: Real Science making a comeback!


+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts