|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
4th January 2018, 10:03 AM | #361 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 10:05 AM | #362 |
Lackey
Administrator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,987
|
|
__________________
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago |
|
4th January 2018, 10:06 AM | #363 |
Lackey
Administrator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,987
|
|
__________________
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago |
|
4th January 2018, 10:09 AM | #364 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
"Wrong" can be a thick word, because it can relate to observations; i.e. it is raining or not.
It can relate to abstract reasoning; i.e. is 2+2=4 or not. It can relate to feelings and emotions; i.e. "I hate you! You are so wrong and evil!" It can relate to morality and ethics; i.e. "It is wrong to kill another human." I used it in the 4th version. Your turn. |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 10:14 AM | #365 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 10:17 AM | #366 |
Lackey
Administrator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,987
|
You are illustrating what I said about an assumption loaded question. Your question at the moment is in fact pretty much meaningless unless I assume a set of ethics and morals for you. For your question to have meaning will require you to explain your ethics and morals as it relates to the question so that an answer with meaning can be given.
|
__________________
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago |
|
4th January 2018, 10:17 AM | #367 |
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
|
|
__________________
There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021 |
|
4th January 2018, 10:19 AM | #368 |
The Clarity Is Devastating
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 20,891
|
|
__________________
"*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote |
|
4th January 2018, 10:19 AM | #369 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
Religious people do something subjective and that can be shared inter-subjectively. It can be observed, described and explained using science, but science can't answer - what is the meaning with life? - because that is subjective/inter-subjective.
It doesn't mean that I am religious. It just means I know that science can't answer - what is the meaning with life? |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 10:21 AM | #370 |
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
|
|
__________________
There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021 |
|
4th January 2018, 10:22 AM | #371 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 5,036
|
Heisenberg was a philosophical disaster. He had heard of a certain Berkeley but he forgot to read Hume, as Einstein recommended. They didn't get along, of course. A Jew and a Nazi, you know.
Matter can be defined as a family resemblance (Wittgenstein). It doesn't include a precise set of defining features, but a cloud of ressemblances. Therefore a "dialectical materialist" is not the same than a "historical materialist", although Friedrich Engels was ot aware of this and wrote some erroneous books. It is not easy to understand because we have an Aristotelian conceptual framework that is essentialist and we think of matter as a "thing". Even those that claim to be positivists or that they have no philosophy -that it is simply impossible. In an ontological sense matter is everytihg that happens in some coordinates of space and time and only in relation with other things that happen in space and time. It is different from ghosts, spirits, gods and souls because these alleged entities have an existence out of space and/or time. This is to say, none. Of course, spiritual entities can manifest themselves in form of ectoplasms, vanishing images, screams, fires or other matterialized aspects. But these things are really scary and only happen in the movies. |
4th January 2018, 10:28 AM | #372 |
Lackey
Administrator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,987
|
Yes some people do have disabilities in terms of their first person experiences - I am one of them - that doesn't mean that something isn't objective - after all we have blind and deaf humans.
Happiness is a human behaviour, it is something we do, like running, we can make people "feel" happy by many different means, we can record their happiness, we can measure their happiness, we can compare happiness - seems pretty damned objective to me. |
__________________
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago |
|
4th January 2018, 10:29 AM | #373 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 33,710
|
NO..NO.. NO... NO!!!!
We're not going down the path if a tree falls in the forest did it make a sound bull crap. 'Objective' is real and independent of individual perception or perspective. 'Subjective' is a person's opinion or perspective. Obective is never ever ever dependent on the Subjective. While we as individuals may not know with 100 percent certainty that our perception of reality is objectively real, it doesn't change reality. |
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . |
|
4th January 2018, 11:31 AM | #374 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,306
|
Whoaaa there!! Heisenberg might have worked on the German A-Bomb development, but he was not a Nazi. In fact he was outspoken about the need to keep the education of scientists under the auspices of the Academic Community and to not politicize it. He was also criticised by the Deutsche Physik (German Physics) movement because he openly taught about the role of Jewish scientists, and this led to him being investigated by the SS. For this, he came under a fair bit of criticism from Nazi Party media. At one stage, Himmler called Heisenberg a White Jew who should be made to disappear. German? yes (and so was Einstein) Nazi? Definitely not! [/off topic] |
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
4th January 2018, 11:41 AM | #375 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,306
|
THIS
An example in sports, Top Scorer in a match is the player who scores the highest number of points/goals. That is objective, its a fact of the match stats that cannot be denied or debated. Most Valuable Player in a match is the player who, in the opinion of one or more people, contributed the most to his team or the game. It is a subjective judgement based on multiple criteria. |
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
4th January 2018, 11:53 AM | #376 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
|
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
4th January 2018, 11:54 AM | #377 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
Hi guys.
Now we are in a many versus one situation, so I will shift mode of answering. So tl;dr it is. We are debating reality. In order for us to do so we need a model of how words work and since this is also about how reality works in practice; i.e. we also need a model of what scientists do in practice. So words it is. Words or signs require a brain/brains, they have a meaning and they are about something. So are all words everything? No! Are words nothing? No! They are necessary but not sufficient in describing how reality works in practice. Further words are not about the same thing and there are at least 3 different kinds of words. Words we use when we interact with the physical aspects of reality; e.g. gravity. Words when we do abstract reasoning; e.g. 2+2=11. Words when we do emotions, feelings, normative claims and so; e.g. I love you, so I will help you more than I would help other humans, because I love you. (That would for me be my wife.) This relates to objective, inter-subjective and subjective, because e.g. gravity is objective as it is a physical process independent of all humans (if we removed all humans, gravity would still be there.) Mathematics is objective in the sense as without bias and using abstract reasoning some humans can understand 2+2=11. It is inter-subjective in that for earth, if we removed all humans and computer there would be no mathematics. (Ups, maybe I forgot some other great apes and so on.) Love is subjective, because it is a feeling/emotion and thus not without bias. That I love my wife is a behavior/feeling/emotion in me; i.e my brain/body. It can't be seen as you can see e.g. rain and you can't replicate it as a scientist. As a human you could fall in love with my wife, but that wouldn't be you do science or being objective. Now scientists as explained by a philosopher. Science is a human behavior, which can be observed in some humans, but not all. It requires training, because a scientist learns to use her/his brain in a certain manner. So scientists do something, which has different aspects of objective, inter-subjective and subjective. They observe through observation or instruments. They share this behavior(inter-subjective) and reason about their observations and models/theories. They each one have to subjectively to live up to an inter-subjective ethical code of doing this with reason and without bias. Now what about how reality works in practice. Well, tell me what you can do and can't do and that is how reality works in practice. Tell how you use different words and how they work for you. Learn to differentiate between the different things you do and you will notice this. You can't do science all the time, because science is a limited behavior in humans. So I will show you this and if you can replicate this you have learned in practice the limitations of science. Objective: #1a: of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind. #1b: involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena. #2: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations. So since love is a learned behavior and so it is science, let us look at objective as a behavior in humans. For #1 it requires that it is external to a given brain and thus it can be shared with other brains through observation; i.e. see in most cases. For #2 it is the objective description of what is going on without a subjective evaluation. Now the word "happy". Can you observe that other humans use this word? Yes. Can you see happy as happy in other humans? No, you don't see happy, you infer it as a psychological ability unless you e.g. have Asperger syndrome. Can you be happy as expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations? No, but not that happiness is a distortion per se, but rather if you are happy, you are not doing science as science. You could be happy doing science, but that is not science as such. That is you being happy. So can you replicate happiness using only the natural science methodology. No, because you would neither be doing objective #1 nor #2. Science just as love and happiness is a behavior observable in some humans, but not all. Science is useful, but it doesn't work of all of reality, because it is limited human behavior. So is philosophy btw Now guys, I am a naturalist and atheist, but I am also a philosopher and I have learned a different behavior that some of you. So here it is in practice: Reality is neither objective nor subjective. Reality is not just physical, because physical is a limited human behavior. Reality is not just mental (or idealism/religion in some cases), because the mental is a limited human behavior. The same goes for reason and logic as human behaviors. In short, science is useful, but limited as a human behavior. |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 12:00 PM | #378 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 404
|
Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen
intersubjectivity to gain consensus but a question about the meaning of life is not one with an objective answer |
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN |
|
4th January 2018, 12:12 PM | #379 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
No, it is a subjective answer. But to some subjective is "subjective". I am not certain what it means, but it seems to be that they don't like subjectivity. I once saw it claimed like this. "Objectivity is better than subjectivity." The problem is that the word "better" in the context seems to be subjective.
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 12:29 PM | #380 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
|
The inherent problem with all of this rampant solipsism is that all of it's proponents act as if they don't believe a word of it.
Get up in the morning and shave those imaginary whiskers, do they? Why? Have a shower because what? Why have any concern crossing the road? Even if an 18 wheeler hits you, it doesn't matter because the 18 wheeler is not real. That is what solipsism fails. None of it's proponents actually believes a damn word of it. Else clip shows on TV would be full of such Darwin award nominees. |
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
4th January 2018, 12:37 PM | #381 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
Let us say that I am a Boltzmann brain. That I don't believe that nor act as if I am one, wont stop me from being a Boltzmann brain.
Your argument fails in the following manner: If you believe that you are not a Boltzmann brain, that will not determine whether you are a Boltzmann brain or not. Try again. P.S. It is not the first time I have heard this line of reasoning, but it still doesn't work. |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 12:39 PM | #382 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 404
|
Objective is better than subjective with regard to empiricism [ science ] or logic [ mathematics ] This is not a subjective
view but an objective one. Saying it is subjective somewhat implies that it could be wrong and that is definitely not true |
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN |
|
4th January 2018, 12:43 PM | #383 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 12:59 PM | #384 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
So What? Making up fantasy stuff and sharing it with others isn’t the preserve of religious people. All paranormal believers do it. Fiction writers do it. Liars do it.
Yes . No. Science can’t answer because it isn’t a logical/meaningful question that can be logically/meaningfully answered. Before “what is” can be answered it first has to be established that “there is”. Merely believing that life must and does have some meaning doesn’t establish it actually does. Might as well ask "What is the colour of dragons?" Like some other members on this forum your often repeated “I’m not religious” claim contradicts the strong smell of your apparent religiosity. |
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:09 PM | #385 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 404
|
Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen
where you go. The best disciplines for examining the human condition are not science and mathematics but philosophy and psychology |
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN |
|
4th January 2018, 01:16 PM | #386 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
Please explain what you mean by meaningful?
That I find it meaningful to do philosophy is what makes it meaningful to me and subjective. That you apparently don't find philosophy meaningful is meaningful to you and subjective. How you intent to use science and logic on that is beyond me, because of the following: Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical, is neither logical or is it a scientific statement. It is a first person subjective and biased interpretation. Look: "Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical." Now give evidence for that using only science. You can't, because the statement - "Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical" - is neither science nor logical and it is only meaningful, if you find it meaningful. It appears that you are using some form of feelings and/or emotions and that you don't like philosophy. That is okay with me and it doesn't make it wrong, nor you wrong. It just means that you are subjective. |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:17 PM | #387 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:18 PM | #388 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
|
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:21 PM | #389 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
|
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:24 PM | #390 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:26 PM | #391 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:28 PM | #392 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
|
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:32 PM | #393 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:39 PM | #394 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 404
|
The human condition is a reference to our existence in the grand scheme of things and
has got nothing to do with physical injury because it pertains to the mind not the body |
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN |
|
4th January 2018, 01:44 PM | #395 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
Feigned ignorance for the sake of obfuscation . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method Now you answer my questions . . . |
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:50 PM | #396 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Present
Posts: 9,278
|
"The human condition is the characteristics, key events, and situations which compose the essentials of human existence, such as birth, growth, emotionality, aspiration, conflict, and mortality" -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_condition Key events like birth pertain only to the mind and not the body? I would say a serious accident is a key event that pertains to mortality. |
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos. Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated. Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths. |
|
4th January 2018, 01:55 PM | #397 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 404
|
Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen
/ replication / evidence / inter subjectivity / testable hypotheses / potential falsification / peer review |
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN |
|
4th January 2018, 01:56 PM | #398 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
Quote:
You can't because A) it is not empirical or measurable evidence that you find it meaningful and B) you have given no reason other than that you find it meaningful. I get that you like science, but that you like science is not a scientific claim. It is a claim about what you find meaningful or if you like: To you the meaning of life is do science. A person can answer about what she/he find meaningful. You have do so. You find science meaningful. The methodology is to ask a person. The answer is the answer the person gives. |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 01:58 PM | #399 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
|
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
4th January 2018, 02:02 PM | #400 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
|
No it pertains both to the mind and the body.
That you find science meaningful is in your mind and I can only replicate it, if I think/feel like you. You can't observe that science is meaningful and it is only meaningful to you, if it is so. Why did you live out emotionality? Answer that!!! |
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic. #JeSuisAhmed |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|