Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The definition of science: What should it be?
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 76 of 100 (323656)
06-19-2006 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
06-19-2006 11:36 PM


Re: Ontological vs methodological
Norman Borlaug used science to save 1.5 billion lives. That's "billion" with a "b." Your religion had absolutely no power to do the same. If not for science, they would have starved to death.
Don't be such a polly wog, I didn't say science is evil and not useful. It is not inherently bad, just as sex is not inherently bad. All things need the proper boundaries and we as men cannot posses the power to say what those boundaries are. (go ahead, take the bait)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 06-19-2006 11:36 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by AdminNosy, posted 06-19-2006 11:53 PM Rob has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 77 of 100 (323657)
06-19-2006 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Rob
06-19-2006 11:50 PM


Topic Problems -- Warning to Rob
Rob, you seem to have a very hard time staying on the topic. This seems to be apparent in most of the threads you join into.
I suggest you think harder about each post to be sure it is actually on topic and that fact will be apparent to me and others.
If you continue to show a lack of focus I will give you a short initial time out to think more carefully.
Edited by AdminNosy, : Modified title to highlight it for Rob

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Rob, posted 06-19-2006 11:50 PM Rob has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 78 of 100 (323777)
06-20-2006 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Rob
06-19-2006 11:46 PM


Re: Ontological vs methodological
quote:
Confidence is your weakness...
Jesus said plainly, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'
And Schraf, it's not that that is not true, it is the most profoundly true thing you will ever hear. Stunning in it's boldness and impossibleness... UNLESS! that guy really was who He said He was.
And the only reason you can't accept the possibility is???
Yeah...right...whatever.
Your reply has nothing to do with the question you asked and the answer I provided, and, indeed, is simply a lame preaching attempt to derail the subject.
Remember, we are in a science forum.
So, I'll remind you that you asked:
quote:
How will you ever know that it's true?
...and I asnwered:
We won't ever have perfect knowledge of anything, but we can know with a good degree of confidence when we are on the right track.
Perhaps we should stop using the word "truth" and start using the word "accurate" instead. Science strives to create models (aka theories) of natural phenomena which have greater and greater accuracy.
A particularly accurate theory will survive many tests, and it will have great predictive and explanatory power. It will also often give rise to entire new fields of scientific study.
Now, how about that second paragraph?
I think that you need to differentiate between Truth and truth.
If you think that you will find Truth (some kind of Ultimate Answer to the Meaning of Life) from science, you are barking up the wrong tree.
Methodological Naturalism is simply a tool; an extremely effective, useful, productive tool. We use it to untangle the puzzles of natural phenomena.
It has nothing at all to say about meaning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Rob, posted 06-19-2006 11:46 PM Rob has not replied

  
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 100 (327316)
06-28-2006 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Rob
06-19-2006 11:14 PM


Rob writes
quote:
'True' morality is 'timeless' because it is 'real' and 'absolute', but I digress...
What the hell does this have to do with the definition of science?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Rob, posted 06-19-2006 11:14 PM Rob has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 80 of 100 (327342)
06-28-2006 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Rob
06-19-2006 11:14 PM


AHH NOT AGAIN
That is the danger of science in the hands of a Godless state...
I know this is off topic, so please don't reply...
Nazi Germany was a Christian state and Hitler claimed to be Christian
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Rob, posted 06-19-2006 11:14 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 12:24 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 81 of 100 (327352)
06-28-2006 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Rob
06-19-2006 11:14 PM


why not kill off the weaker and troublesome among us for the betterment of the greater good. It is a huge logical moral dilemma for the naturalist.
Only for those naturalists with a skewed view of what "survival of the fittest" means. Hitler took it the wrong way.
See, humans thrive off of being social, and part of being social is having a set of rules, standards, morals. You want to keep the people who . . .well, screw it. You're gonna take it the wrong way if I type this. Point is, there is no moral dilemma for naturalists in regards to evolution--that is, for those who properly understand it.

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Rob, posted 06-19-2006 11:14 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Rob, posted 06-28-2006 11:50 PM kuresu has not replied
 Message 83 by Rob, posted 06-28-2006 11:53 PM kuresu has not replied
 Message 84 by jar, posted 06-29-2006 12:06 AM kuresu has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 82 of 100 (327357)
06-28-2006 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by kuresu
06-28-2006 11:10 PM


Lol

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by kuresu, posted 06-28-2006 11:10 PM kuresu has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 83 of 100 (327358)
06-28-2006 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by kuresu
06-28-2006 11:10 PM


Can you give me an idea of what unnatural behavior would be as a scientific definition?
I think you'll find that killing is natural. Lust is natural. Envy is natural.
Selfishness is natural...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by kuresu, posted 06-28-2006 11:10 PM kuresu has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 84 of 100 (327361)
06-29-2006 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by kuresu
06-28-2006 11:10 PM


Science = Ethics
It has been my wondrous discovery that Ethics are far more likely found in the realm of the Naturalist Scientist than in Theology. Science and scientists take ethics seriously. That cannot be said of Theologists, particularly those esposing the YEC or Biblical Creationist position.
In science the data, the evidence is inviolable. If a scientist is discovered falsifying data, using data that has been refuted, or even excluding that data which does not support his position, that scientist is likely to never work or get funded again. Every bit of his work, often going back many decades is pulled up and gone over with a fine toothed comb looking for any errors of ommission or commission.
Ethics seems to me to be far more common, far more normal, far more deep-seated and indwelling in the Naturalist world than in the Theological world.
Look at the lack of adverse reaction from the YEC and Biblical Creationist communities to those who lied under oath in Dover, or the continued use of falsified evidence by the likes of Ron Wyatt, of the outright lies of the leaders of the Evangelical community like Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, Jerry Falwell, Gene Scott.
The Naturalist community in general, and the Scientific community in particular seems to have a far greater understanding of honesty, ethics and morality than is seen in the public religious communities as represented by the televangelists, the Hams, the Wyatts, the Morrises or the Phelps.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by kuresu, posted 06-28-2006 11:10 PM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 12:28 AM jar has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 85 of 100 (327364)
06-29-2006 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
06-28-2006 10:01 PM


Re: AHH NOT AGAIN
You cannot leave that our there like that without a response. it's simply unfair! If the moderators wish to hide this response and your post it is ok. But I simply must respond....
You are correct! Hitler was a public Christian, just as Saddam Hussein was (excuse me... is) a public Muslim.
Let's look at Stalin... A seminary student, but he rejected faith in the end. At least Stalin was consistent albeit consistently evil. His daughter Svetlana Stalin, in an interview with Malcolm Muggeridge, told of how her father died. Joseph Stalin suddenly sat up, shook his fist to the heavens, in a defiant gesture, and fell back into his bed and died.
I know this... the definition of science lacks the ability to address such things.
True science is not (in my opinion) material impericism, but metaphysical revelation.
Don't worry! I'm in no position to affect the convention. I am only one man.
I only attempt to influence individual members of the forum...
Rob
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to the off topic portions of this post or continue in that vein.
AdminPD
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 06-28-2006 10:01 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by rgb, posted 06-29-2006 4:02 AM Rob has replied
 Message 88 by Percy, posted 06-29-2006 9:17 AM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 86 of 100 (327366)
06-29-2006 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by jar
06-29-2006 12:06 AM


Re: Science = Ethics
Speaking of public Christians
ps. Dear purple dawn, jar is right; Aslan is not a tame lion. This should be of grave concern to you, as He is going to return. Please don't try to fight Him.
Couldn't help myself Phat...
OFF TOPIC - If you must read content, use the Peek button but do not respond.
AdminPD
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Contents Off Topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by jar, posted 06-29-2006 12:06 AM jar has not replied

  
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 100 (327389)
06-29-2006 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Rob
06-29-2006 12:24 AM


Re: AHH NOT AGAIN
Rob writes
quote:
True science is not (in my opinion) material impericism, but metaphysical revelation.
I am speechless. Simply speechless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 12:24 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by PurpleYouko, posted 06-29-2006 9:51 AM rgb has not replied
 Message 91 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 10:21 AM rgb has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 88 of 100 (327434)
06-29-2006 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Rob
06-29-2006 12:24 AM


Empiricism versus Revelation
Rob writes:
True science is not (in my opinion) material impericism, but metaphysical revelation.
It's "empiricism".
To measure the acceleration of gravity, an empirical approach might drop an object next to a long measuring stick while flashing a strobe light with a camera pointed at the whole arrangement. Then you'd measure the spacing of the images of the object on film and derive the acceleration of gravity.
How would you find the acceleration of gravity using metaphysical revelation?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 12:24 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 10:20 AM Percy has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 89 of 100 (327439)
06-29-2006 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by rgb
06-29-2006 4:02 AM


Re: AHH NOT AGAIN
Seconded.
In the face of comments like that it becomes painfully obvious that we are wasting our time.
I also fear that we could easily slip back into the dark ages if this kind of thought becomes prevalent in those who make the laws.
This is the perfect example of why scientists fight so hard to keep ID and other nonsense, out of the class room

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by rgb, posted 06-29-2006 4:02 AM rgb has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Rob, posted 06-29-2006 10:23 AM PurpleYouko has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 90 of 100 (327452)
06-29-2006 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Percy
06-29-2006 9:17 AM


Re: Empiricism versus Revelation
How would you find the acceleration of gravity using metaphysical revelation?
All of you are completely misunderstanding what I say...
I would not use metaphysical revelation to find such things. And does gravity accelerate, or does the object by way of gravity?
Empericists attempt to find out how the machine works.
Metaphysics is a search for why the machine is here...
I simply think the latter of the two is more important to understand...
Science is wonderful, but for too many people (perhaps, not you), it serves a purpose it cannot; to answer or deny the bigger existential questions...
Sorry for any confusion...
Rbo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Percy, posted 06-29-2006 9:17 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by rgb, posted 06-29-2006 12:56 PM Rob has replied
 Message 96 by Percy, posted 06-29-2006 1:43 PM Rob has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024