hubris
New Member
Posts: 1
Likes: 3
|
Post by hubris on Apr 14, 2018 7:04:28 GMT
According to Khun, science itself had its own limits. Every scientific method is contained in its paradigm, its mode through which it understands the world. It reaches its limit at a certain epoch in history. But given this thesis, we are thus perpetually lost in our own confines, never reaching anything grounding (in-itself) but only engaging in constant re-discovery and re-formulation. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 15, 2018 20:42:00 GMT
Science is a student. Then it teaches what it learned. But it's technically a student and is learning.
|
|
Festtt
New Member
Posts: 15
Likes: 11
|
Post by Festtt on Apr 16, 2018 0:31:05 GMT
Because those are outside what the realm of what is possible to physically experiment. To know anything thanks to science, you have to: 1 - make observations 2 - induce a theory 3 - test (not just observe) the said theory in a controlled environment. For those metaphysical (beyond physics) questions, you can make observations and induce a theory but you cannot invalidate it in case it is false since there is no way of testing if the soul is immortal (for example). Those unproven theory that cannot be invalidate is what you call religion. The way you have been talking about the subject is very short term and your conclusions that you base on today may not hold forever. We have no idea how we'll even experience the world far in the future so calling out what is and what isn't possible now already seems a bit odd. We will evolve and our science will evolve with us. If there's a soul maybe we'll discover it. Lets say we merge with technology and become 4-dimensional beings for example. What tools will that offer? No one knows, we can't imagine it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2018 6:36:25 GMT
More than simply to test. Science is used to explain and to mathematically model the physical phonomenons we encounter. And yet it cannot explain everything Well maybe not right now, but perhaps one day it will be able to
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Apr 16, 2018 6:48:44 GMT
And yet it cannot explain everything Well maybe not right now, but perhaps one day it will be able to With how often science changes, I highly doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Apr 16, 2018 20:39:47 GMT
And yet it cannot explain everything Well maybe not right now, but perhaps one day it will be able to To think science can explain everything one day would be to think humanity will understand everything one day, as much as I have faith in humanity I don’t ever see us becoming omniscient. Which is a fun word to me now because Omni means all and sciens means knowing in Latin is like saying All Science ;p
|
|
rpeters
New Member
Posts: 35
Likes: 21
|
Post by rpeters on Apr 17, 2018 6:12:24 GMT
According to Khun, science itself had its own limits. Every scientific method is contained in its paradigm, its mode through which it understands the world. It reaches its limit at a certain epoch in history. But given this thesis, we are thus perpetually lost in our own confines, never reaching anything grounding (in-itself) but only engaging in constant re-discovery and re-formulation. What are your thoughts? Excellent question. Thanks for asking it.
In my view of "it all" yes. We are either to search for a better way or settle on one view or idea. With science we feel we have a firm grasp but we only have the grasp that our technology and minds are capable to view. Further, and possibly most importantly we each have what works best for us in how we make sense life. That what works right now of course may well not work later this week and the solidity you perceive there in ultimately will crumble or be molded into something closer to what makes sense to you personally. The more you ask why, the more you investigate your "facts" of your life, the more your fluid life/mind changes with the new prospective found. As for what makes me feel "okish" is that I try and work towards a better tomorrow, immediate and lasting. So I look at what I do, how I react and what I say trying to ensure that my moving through life is as amicable, societally, as it can be. We only use knee-jerk reactions because we have no control over our lives. We react, lash out what have you because we haven't figured out how we can take a second to think of the ups and downs of what we spout out. I am not a "hippy" though it may sound like I tread softly on the grass, instead in my view of reality each an everyone of us are one Human family. Nothing more and nothing less. Not only are we genetically profoundly similar, we have interchangeable parts. And a drug that works to fight malaria on me probably works on you. For a long time I have been plagued with the "why" bug about everything I seem to come across. I have looked into theology, ideologies, history, sci-fi, literature, philosophy, psychology and I live a life in science and so education. What has thus far been presented as a "way" isn't quite an amicable enough fit to get on board any path other than we are here, against very long odds, we survive, physiologically for a period and we return to the cosmos, particles to be used in other processes. Anything we leave behind is in the good and bad ways we have treated people. IN how and what we have searched for, found or flopped at. But what is missed in this equation that we are a part of a single family. Yes we have conquered every part of this planet and some of the atmosphere and a little beyond but we haven't grown beyond the importance of self to see that the whole needs to be taken into account in order for the self to truly be "ok". Science attempts mostly to work in a communal way where vaccines or techniques and observations are shared but mostly they are very constricted to teams and the funders of the project, the corporate backers and the governments. As Humans we possess the hive mentality of cooperation but it has been perverted into only including your friends/family, your team, state, country, race, religion, your "American idol" what have you. We are working together but not towards the bigger, familial "ok-ness", only "ok" for me and mine. So with these in mind I trudge forward always pushing for progress, though it seems mostly I bang my head against the same arguments constantly. I hope not for you can see what I say as the "answer" for it is not and that is not what I push, I just hope that you have the strength to follow your whys to a conclusion you can live with. Good luck out there
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 7:12:46 GMT
Also, Paul Feyerabend wrote in his 'Against Method', that creativity is higher, than just rational steps in scientific checked way. For example, Descartes wasn't right when he chose rational way, or F. Bacon's looking forward to whole empiric path.
A paradigm (in Khun's terms) gather ways of epistemology of the Universe inside an epoch, or just in a certain period of history. Yes, it is, but it changes nothing, because math yesterday and math today is the same. There can be 10 axioms of Hilbert in math, or the math can ground on 'formalism', or 'intuitionism' doctrines, or either on 'quantum logic' systems. It changes just an image of the world.
Differences occur in 'Scientific picture of the Universe'. Usually, it's getting wider all the time. There are problems in this way: they appear when 'Whole picture' requires coherency, and more systematizing. A philosophers is the one who tries ties that knots together in a whole picture. Scientists don't do that, because they're going to use their methods, not making puzzles.
So, there's no obstacles for science using and grounding on paradigms, just as living in downtown, or in a country is not an obstacle for chemist to do his researches.
|
|
Mahaluz
New Member
Posts: 29
Likes: 16
|
Post by Mahaluz on Apr 19, 2018 9:22:59 GMT
You should read upon "Technology Singularity", when we will create an AI that can develop and exponentionally impove itself, we will create God. We do know now that everything in the universe is made out of matter and anti matter, particles, etc. So technically speaking everything can be made if you have the resources and the right equation. An AI that can exponentionally improve itself will know all and everything, thus will be our (humans) last creation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 12:45:53 GMT
You should read upon "Technology Singularity", when we will create an AI that can develop and exponentionally impove itself, we will create God. We do know now that everything in the universe is made out of matter and anti matter, particles, etc. So technically speaking everything can be made if you have the resources and the right equation. An AI that can exponentionally improve itself will know all and everything, thus will be our (humans) last creation. Yeah! I would kneel before such a God eternally... But we have a problem here: if our technologies allow us to build such a God, why should we need such a God then, for aesthetic wishes? Just steal this methods of creation gods, and do what do you want. The second paradox in 'creating Ai' and 'AI's improving itself'. If 'AI' is intelligence, it can decided to run around human beings, not to improve itself for people. It should be noted for our own safe. Any 'AI' is the weapon, and we have to do by cooperation to prevent using it by dictators. I think creation gods, and AIs with tools is just another weird idea, as arising the Third Rome. We didn't teach to be politely to each other, will the weapon be the savior?.. probably, not. This path is for ruining us as human natures. All these weapon challenges represent just a stupidity of the ones who make it. They're afraid of being destroyed, and they're going to increase the weapons... The rage between people grow during the weapon race, leaving no common sense. Why to build something beautiful if you have a gun?.. Let's look at the words of Socrates in Plato's 'Gorgias' (fragments from 469b-469e): Socrates:
Only he who unjustly put some one to death, my friend, and I called him pitiable as well: if he acted justly, then he is unenviable.
Polus:
I suppose, at any rate, the man who is put to death unjustly is both pitiable and wretched.
Socrates:
Less so than he who puts him to death, Polus, and less so than he who is put to death justly.
Polus:
In what way can that be, Socrates ?
Socrates:
In this, that to do wrong is the greatest of evils.
Polus:
What, is this the greatest? Is not to suffer wrong a greater?
Socrates:
By no means.
Polus:
Then would you wish rather to suffer wrong than to do it?
Socrates:
I should wish neither, for my own part; but if it were necessary either to do wrong or to suffer it, I should choose to suffer rather than do it.
Polus:
Then you would not accept a despot's power?
Socrates:
No, if you mean by a despot's power the same as I do.
Polus:
Why, what I mean is, as I did just now, the liberty of doing anything one thinks fit in one's city—putting people to death and expelling them and doing everything at one's own discretion.
Socrates:
My gifted friend, let me speak, and you shall take me to task in your turn.
Suppose that in a crowded market I should hide a dagger under my arm and then say to you: “Polus, I have just acquired, by a wonderful chance, the power of a despot; for if I should think fit that one of those people whom you see there should die this very instant, a dead man he will be, just as I think fit; or if I think fit that one of them shall have his head broken, broken it will be immediately; or to have his cloak torn in pieces,torn it will be: so great is my power in this city.” Then suppose that on your disbelieving this I showed you my dagger; I expect when you saw it you would say: “Socrates, at this rate every one would have great power, for any house you thought fit might be set ablaze on these methods, and the Athenian arsenals also, and the men-of-war and all the rest of the shipping, both public and private.” But surely this is not what it is to have great power—merely doing what one thinks fit. Or do you think it is?
Polus:
Oh no, not in that way.
As you can see, daggers or the other weapons is just a tool of pitiful person. So, I think there's no need to build such Last Creations, the more fair, the more well-fare. Playing with fire is the path only to Abyss.
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Apr 19, 2018 17:35:24 GMT
Great comments you two. I was just about to come to this topic and say, I think this conversation has become obsolete, but I see now you guys are taking it in a different direction, and arriving at different conclusion, and that there is a lot to take away from what you guys are saying. Given you both have an in depth understanding of the topic given, seeing how science has been known to change dramatically over the years, and that because science is mans current understanding of how things work, it is essentially a philosophy that changes overtime as well. As with the ‘Technological God’ that will improve itself for all of eternity, we are currently struggling to make it to Mars, hold your horses. I’m unaware if you guys know the vastness of information in the world, if we covered Earth, every square mile of it with memory cards, hard drives, etc, there still would not be enough storage to hold all the data needed to calculate the percievable! universe. ;p not to mention there is no sign of an ending just yet you guys are aware we live in a giant mind right? Which likely has thoughts of its own. sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/physics-book.htmlWoooooooahhhh... woahhh, neyyyyyyy .. well I thought it was funny :(
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 18:11:57 GMT
Great comments you two. I was just about to come to this topic and say, I think this conversation has become obsolete, but I see now you guys are taking it in a different direction, and arriving at different conclusion, and that there is a lot to take away from what you guys are saying. Given you both have an in depth understanding of the topic given, seeing how science has been known to change dramatically over the years, and that because science is mans current understanding of how things work, it is essentially a philosophy that changes overtime as well. As with the ‘Technological God’ that will improve itself for all of eternity, we are currently struggling to make it to Mars, hold your horses. I’m unaware if you guys know the vastness of information in the world, if we covered Earth, every square mile of it with memory cards, hard drives, etc, there still would not be enough storage to hold all the data needed to calculate the percievable! universe. ;p not to mention there is no sign of an ending just yet you guys are aware we live in a giant mind right? Which likely has thoughts of its own. sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/physics-book.htmlWoooooooahhhh... woahhh, neyyyyyyy .. well I thought it was funny :( Your links are very well! Thanks a lot, that you're saying that me and my colleague are well-known in subject. (I don't know about my vis-a-vis, but I don't get involved in it deeply. I chose philosophy side, just because it happened. Everything's changing so fast, that sometimes I think that tomorrow all my info about today will be failed... Frankly speaking, it is another problem, because, I think, it seems to be loosing our past... or, maybe I'm just too pessimistic on it...) It's pitiful I won't buy The Physics Book, because of English, and I've had enough even of 'Logic for Dummies', and other popular books in English. (I mean being foreigner speaker of English is not too easy to get everything correctly from specific literature.) Anyway, what do you think about 'Sky-Net' affairs on it, and what do you think about non-unique of Human culture? And if quantum computer will be built, it allows to make more researches, right?.. Let's imagine: after QC would be built, we would find more info about surrounding world; and after it the Man would become an intergalactic emperor! We will rule the universe! The Man will kill every living creature in the Universe! Our Gods would be Gods for every aliens! We will ruin the Universe to its core!.. After millions of great battles, being hungry and too tired, finally the Man raised against the laws of the Universe. He will take it and break it. The universe will kneel at the Man! The Man will become God!.. It is our future, and now we know which God shall be praised - the Man, a destroyer of the planets, and a ruiner or the galaxies, a killer of whole Universe! Our Man, Who art in us, Hallowed be Thy mind. Thy kingdom come, Thy willen be done, On Earth, as it is in Universe. An Lead us not into emoji, but Delever us to Mars. Elon.
...Well, it's a joke.
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Apr 19, 2018 18:33:53 GMT
Great comments you two. I was just about to come to this topic and say, I think this conversation has become obsolete, but I see now you guys are taking it in a different direction, and arriving at different conclusion, and that there is a lot to take away from what you guys are saying. Given you both have an in depth understanding of the topic given, seeing how science has been known to change dramatically over the years, and that because science is mans current understanding of how things work, it is essentially a philosophy that changes overtime as well. As with the ‘Technological God’ that will improve itself for all of eternity, we are currently struggling to make it to Mars, hold your horses. I’m unaware if you guys know the vastness of information in the world, if we covered Earth, every square mile of it with memory cards, hard drives, etc, there still would not be enough storage to hold all the data needed to calculate the percievable! universe. ;p not to mention there is no sign of an ending just yet you guys are aware we live in a giant mind right? Which likely has thoughts of its own. sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/physics-book.htmlWoooooooahhhh... woahhh, neyyyyyyy .. well I thought it was funny :( Your links are very well! Thanks a lot, that you're saying that me and my colleague are well-known in subject. (I don't know about my vis-a-vis, but I don't get involved in it deeply. I chose philosophy side, just because it happened. Everything's changing so fast, that sometimes I think that tomorrow all my info about today will be failed... Frankly speaking, it is another problem, because, I think, it seems to be loosing our past... or, maybe I'm just too pessimistic on it...) It's pitiful I won't buy The Physics Book, because of English, and I've had enough even of 'Logic for Dummies', and other popular books in English. (I mean being foreigner speaker of English is not too easy to get everything correctly from specific literature.) Anyway, what do you think about 'Sky-Net' affairs on it, and what do you think about non-unique of Human culture? And if quantum computer will be built, it allows to make more researches, right?.. Let's imagine: after QC would be built, we would find more info about surrounding world; and after it the Man would become an intergalactic emperor! We will rule the universe! The Man will kill every living creature in the Universe! Our Gods would be Gods for every aliens! We will ruin the Universe to its core!.. After millions of great battles, being hungry and too tired, finally the Man raised against the laws of the Universe. He will take it and break it. The universe will kneel at the Man! The Man will become God!.. It is our future, and now we know which God shall be praised - the Man, a destroyer of the planets, and a ruiner or the galaxies, a killer of whole Universe! Our Man, Who art in us, Hallowed be Thy mind. Thy kingdom come, Thy willen be done, On Earth, as it is in Universe. An Lead us not into emoji, but Delever us to Mars. Elon.
...Well, it's a joke. Hahaha very funny. You should read my How do you imagine yourself? Post. It sounded pretty similar I don’t know, I don’t take much joy beating up non living objects! Punches wall, kicks rock! Huh what now? *sees rock staring at flower* Oh you like this flower? *steps on it* *waits for response* *sees rock tear up* Yeah that’s right *rock still not moving* I’m your master, you will bend to my will *tries to bend rock* *rock does not bend* *sulks realizing I live on a rock*
|
|