Scientism, Skepticism and the Philosophy of Science

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]ephrem wrote:
No, i’ve not been lurking. Just needed a breath of fresh air.

I’m doing great, thanks for asking Cortes (:

How are things on your side of the planet?

Shaky?[/quote]

Heheh. Dark, man, dark.

Yeah, I am well south of all the chaos, so I will still be able to come visit you over the in the land of decadence some day. And you are still welcome to visit me without too much fear of being swallowed up by the earth, washed away, or going home with any extra limbs or tentacles (unless you choose to bring them back with you :wink:

62

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Hard science is a philosophical method based on observation. It only requires the existence of a falsifiable premise (hypothesis) and method of measurement that bears repeatable results. [/quote]

Falsifiability requires free will. If we did not have free will, our conclusions about the outcomes of experiments would be predetermined, therefore science requires free will.

Free will puts humans in a special place. Where does free will come from? [/quote]

Free will transcends individual human action. That human beings act proves that free will exists. No human action could occur with out it.[/quote]

Why isn’t it that gravitational forces acting proves that free will exists? Humans are special and science cannot explain why.[/quote]

i bet ants think they are pretty special too. gorillas, chimps and apes too.[/quote]

Who cares what they think? The question is whether they make free will choices that while allowed by the laws of physics do not have to obey probabilistic tendancies.

Lets say we have two and only two probabalistic “choices” in a given situation which are equally probable. There is no energetic difference between the two choices, and quantum physics predicts that each will occur with a 50% probability, but only 1 does occur. When that one occurs by human choice, if we believe that we actually made the choice, then it was 100% probable-in other words, if you believe in human free will, you must believe that humans can shift quantum probability curves.

There is another way around it, which is the multiple universe hypothesis, but no one is defending that model. If you want to believe that, then you should argue that, but I’m not sure you are ready because you have already shown your inability to follow the line of argument that led to my post.[/quote]

First, to attempt to merge QM with human nature is a butchering of QM. QM is the apparent law of the microscopic, [/quote]

Such as the electromagnetic fields around the atoms of the brain? QM does not “disappear” at the macroscopic scale, it just becomes less obvious and important, but the magnitude doesn’t matter.

Does an individual human make choices, and if so, does science have the potential ability to predict those choices with absolute certainty?

Do you call it “butchering” because you don’t think that QM has any effect on the large scale?
[/quote]

why don’t you explain how QM affects our decisions. I’m not playing along until you do. Explain your premise, based on accepted science, and then we’ll discuss it.

63

Well, if i ever manage to save up enough for a trip to Japan i’m glad to know there’s someone i can harass for free meals and lodgings!

Hopefully things won’t get too out of hand over there. If i didn’t know better i’d think the apocalypse is nigh.

64

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:<<< I don’t have a problem with science, just when its applied outside of its limits. >>>[/quote]From almost a year ago now. A reply to my buddy Ephrem who I miss very much.
I said:[quote]<<< This does not in any way mean that I reject the relentless pursuit of knowledge. Quite the contrary. When ones sees all of existence as the unavoidable revelation of the wisdom and power of God, knowledge is all the sweeter. People think Christians hide from science in fear they may find something to damage their faith. Not me. I jump in with both feet, whoooopeeee!!! Splash it all over myself. It enhances the focus on just how little I deserve the loving kindness of an uncreated Being, and one that I have fatally offended, who can produce such wonders by fiat command.

Not that I can explain everything. I don’t need to. He is explanation enough. I must confess though that I find unmistakable evidence for the truth of fallen mankind in observing the world of science. It took the world’s most powerful supercomputers a number of years to decode the human genome running calculations 24/7. Scientists are then heralded as representing the pinnacle of reason, logic and erudition for declaring this to have happened by accident. The genome itself and by extension the equipment required to open it’s secrets, but I am an anachronistic moron for believing that somebody ultimately designed both.[/quote]
[/quote]This is for you T:

[/quote]Absolutely brilliant!!! I am not kidding. That was one of if not THE finest flash production I have ever heard of, but you could have written the content yourself. Exactly what you’ve been tellin me since day one and pretty much the standard humanist/rationalist/naturalist view. I’m gonna have to pray that the Lord helps me believe His theology, the same theology I declare here all the time, much more perfectly. I am still dismayed when you miss the point by a couple hundred million light years even though I keep tellin you that’s exactly what you’re supposed to do. Guys like Bambi don’t help either because he does or at least appears to sorta get it and thus unwittingly eggs me on.

That’s a confession btw.

65

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Hard science is a philosophical method based on observation. It only requires the existence of a falsifiable premise (hypothesis) and method of measurement that bears repeatable results. [/quote]

Falsifiability requires free will. If we did not have free will, our conclusions about the outcomes of experiments would be predetermined, therefore science requires free will.

Free will puts humans in a special place. Where does free will come from? [/quote]

Free will transcends individual human action. That human beings act proves that free will exists. No human action could occur with out it.[/quote]

Why isn’t it that gravitational forces acting proves that free will exists? Humans are special and science cannot explain why.[/quote]

i bet ants think they are pretty special too. gorillas, chimps and apes too.[/quote]

Who cares what they think? The question is whether they make free will choices that while allowed by the laws of physics do not have to obey probabilistic tendancies.

Lets say we have two and only two probabalistic “choices” in a given situation which are equally probable. There is no energetic difference between the two choices, and quantum physics predicts that each will occur with a 50% probability, but only 1 does occur. When that one occurs by human choice, if we believe that we actually made the choice, then it was 100% probable-in other words, if you believe in human free will, you must believe that humans can shift quantum probability curves.

There is another way around it, which is the multiple universe hypothesis, but no one is defending that model. If you want to believe that, then you should argue that, but I’m not sure you are ready because you have already shown your inability to follow the line of argument that led to my post.[/quote]

First, to attempt to merge QM with human nature is a butchering of QM. QM is the apparent law of the microscopic, [/quote]

Such as the electromagnetic fields around the atoms of the brain? QM does not “disappear” at the macroscopic scale, it just becomes less obvious and important, but the magnitude doesn’t matter.

Does an individual human make choices, and if so, does science have the potential ability to predict those choices with absolute certainty?

Do you call it “butchering” because you don’t think that QM has any effect on the large scale?
[/quote]

why don’t you explain how QM affects our decisions. I’m not playing along until you do. Explain your premise, based on accepted science, and then we’ll discuss it. [/quote]

OK, Newton at one point, and others had said that if we knew the position and momentum of every particle at an instant, and had a complete model, we could predict the future forever, including the actions of humans. QM says we can’t ever have all of that knowledge, and so a given human may have multiple possible future paths which are all completely consistent with even the most complete possible model of physics. In other words, science can tell you what you can’t do, but within those limits what you actually do in the future is not pre-determined.

Now the same is true of elementary particles, but we believe that our choices are not just random, but that we actually insert a will into following one path versus another path, or making one choice over another. If you believe that you can make choices that determine what “path” you follow then you accept something that science can not explain. If you don’t, then everything is predetermined, and since science requires falsifiability, science would fail because if your conclusions were predetermined then outcomes of experiments would not be falsefiable.

66

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
ephrem wrote:This is for you T:

Absolutely brilliant!!! I am not kidding. That was one of if not THE finest flash production I have ever heard of, but you could have written the content yourself. Exactly what you’ve been tellin me since day one and pretty much the standard humanist/rationalist/naturalist view. I’m gonna have to pray that the Lord helps me believe His theology, the same theology I declare here all the time, much more perfectly. I am still dismayed when you miss the point by a couple hundred million light years even though I keep tellin you that’s exactly what you’re supposed to do. Guys like Bambi don’t help either because he does or at least appears to sorta get it and thus unwittingly eggs me on.

That’s a confession btw.

[/quote]

A confession of what exactly?

67

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< A confession of what exactly? >>>[/quote]Practice somewhat inconsistent with my preaching. How many times have I told you that you will not see the truth of the derivative nature of your reality until raised in Christ? The truth that no object of knowledge exists independently of the God who is it’s author and that your use of reason cannot but lead you exactly to that very illusory and sinful independence? A few dozen? And then you post for me a VERY impressively produced animation piece that VERY persuasively restates everything I’ve already told you I see as entirely secondary and already begging the real questions. I confess that I still find myself wondering why you don’t get it when I’ve told you why over and over.

I did miss you btw. That was not a sarcastic remark. Regardless of what you think I do hold you in high regard and do enjoy conversing with you.

68

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< A confession of what exactly? >>>[/quote]Practice somewhat inconsistent with my preaching. How many times have I told you that you will not see the truth of the derivative nature of your reality until raised in Christ? The truth that no object of knowledge exists independently of the God who is it’s author and that your use of reason cannot but lead you exactly to that very illusory and sinful independence? A few dozen? And then you post for me a VERY impressively produced animation piece that VERY persuasively restates everything I’ve already told you I see as entirely secondary and already begging the real questions. I confess that I still find myself wondering why you don’t get it when I’ve told you why over and over.

I did miss you btw. That was not a sarcastic remark. Regardless of what you think I do hold you in high regard and do enjoy conversing with you.
[/quote]

The reason why i’m unwilling to listen to you; one of the main reasons why i’m unwilling to listen to you, is you and the way you conduct yourself as a believer.

Furthermore, aside from the fact that i think the beliefs you hold are made of fool’s gold, all i railed and objected against is religion and the singular and divise idea of the Abrahamic monotheistic asshole god.

If you wonder why you’ve failed at conveying truth as you believe it when it’s so clear to you, maybe it’s not so much about the truthfulness of what you believe [since that’s obscured by your zeal to witness] but simply because i dismiss your truth, your beliefs and your religion because i see it for what it is: one of many ways to deal with reality in a palatable manner, and to bring a community or society together as a means for survival.

Does that mean i deny the possibility that A Great Mystery exists? No, i do not. I’m denying that this Great Mystery is bound to your specific flavor of religion.

The reason why you fail to let me see the light is the same reason why i can’t show you the folly of your convictions. Whatever works for you and whatever works for me stand at the opposite ends of the spectrum, and the twain shall never meet.

69

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< The reason why i’m unwilling to listen to you; one of the main reasons why i’m unwilling to listen to you, is you and the way you conduct yourself as a believer. >>>[/quote]Please tell me more. Don’t hold back. There may be a valuable personal lesson there for me. You are very wrong if you think I do not believe that God could use you to teach me.

70

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< The reason why i’m unwilling to listen to you; one of the main reasons why i’m unwilling to listen to you, is you and the way you conduct yourself as a believer. >>>[/quote]Please tell me more. Don’t hold back. There may be a valuable personal lesson there for me. You are very wrong if you think I do not believe that God could use you to teach me.
[/quote]

Your behaviour is an extension of your beliefsystem. You know this, and perceive this behaviour as a natural consequence of having been born again spiritually.

Nothing i can say will change that because no man can change what you believe.

This leaves us at an impasse.

What you may need to ponder is whether it’s absolutely vital HOW people find god, or that it doesn’t matter how they find god, just as long as they do.

Because, and let’s make this clear, there is no difference between the way you experience your religiosity and the experience of any other devout and sincere believer of any other beliefsystem.

You may also need to ponder whether how you conduct yourself as a proponent of your religion is for your own pleasure [how masochistic that sometimes may seem] or whether it’s meant to attract people to your god.

What you, and a few other firm believers on PWI, do instead is confirm the reasons why atheists, agnostics and other secular persons want nothing to do with religion.

Your kind of actions, and those of politicians who forget that there’s separation of church and state in your country: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/idaho-almighty-abortion/ and http://www.nbc11news.com/home/headlines/Atheism_on_the_rise_119157949.html may even lead to people leaving religion alltogether.

Keep up the good work, i’d say!

71

This is exactly the point I’ve made to him several times, but he doesn’t get it.

Apparently, everyone else was misled by Satan in their religious experience, but Tirib was not.

72

Ephrem that is not what I thought you might say except the part below brushed up against it a bit.[quote]<<< You may also need to ponder whether how you conduct yourself as a proponent of your religion is for your own pleasure [how masochistic that sometimes may seem] or whether it’s meant to attract people to your god. >>>[/quote]

73

[quote]forlife wrote:

This is exactly the point I’ve made to him several times, but he doesn’t get it.

Apparently, everyone else was misled by Satan in their religious experience, but Tirib was not.[/quote]

This is also why i could never regress towards religious beliefs as they require one to maintain the illusion of absolute truth over all the other religious beliefs out there.

74

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Ephrem that is not what I thought you might say except the part below brushed up against it a bit.[quote]<<< You may also need to ponder whether how you conduct yourself as a proponent of your religion is for your own pleasure [how masochistic that sometimes may seem] or whether it’s meant to attract people to your god. >>>[/quote][/quote]

So what did you expect me to say?

75
76

[quote]ephrem wrote:

Bible Scholars do not agree about the age of the Gospels being decades later. We have scrolls of Mark in Aramaic now from circa 33 AD.

The miracles are not taken by Christians as being a reason for believing in God.

Christians do not generically hold that that God is needed to fill in the gaps in science that will not otherwise be explained.

Simply: Quantum Mechanics requires that the Universe is not deterministic. It is limited but not every event is pre-determined.

Science requires that humans can influence the course of actions by their free will choice, else there would be no “falsefiability” which is an axiom of science. Without free will science fails. With free will, science must accept something that it can not explain, even in principle 100%.

At least a scientist must admit that there is something that provides for free will and is inaccessable at least in its entirety to scientific explanation. You can explain HOW free will is possible in the universe, and predict human behavior probablistically, but you can not explain why a given person makes a given choice, or even really mechanically HOW.

77

Define free-will.

Provide information of those scroll via links, please.

I’m no scientist, but don’t believe in free-will. Not because reality might not be deterministic, but because we as humans are unable to make a decision that is free of preference, desire or prior knowledge.

For instance, if someone offers me an apple: one red, one yellow, and asks me to choose one; i’d choose the yellow apple. As a child i loved yellow apples and didn’t like the red ones. Yes, i’m free to choose one or the other, but the reasons for making that choice are predetermined.

This discussion will, as they all do, come down to this: believing in a deity is a subjective issue, and whether or not you believe in a deity has no consequences in reality.

The only real-life consequences of beliefs in reality are suicide bombings, the killing of people who oppose or act in opposition of religious beliefs, faith-based legislation that stifles progress and the justification of acts by church leaders that wholly contradict religious teachings.

God is nowhere to be found in reality. God is only found hidden in the wishes, fears and desires of those who believe.

78

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[/quote]

Bible Scholars do not agree about the age of the Gospels being decades later. We have scrolls of Mark in Aramaic now from circa 33 AD.

The miracles are not taken by Christians as being a reason for believing in God.

Christians do not generically hold that that God is needed to fill in the gaps in science that will not otherwise be explained.

Simply: Quantum Mechanics requires that the Universe is not deterministic. It is limited but not every event is pre-determined.

Science requires that humans can influence the course of actions by their free will choice, else there would be no “falsefiability” which is an axiom of science. Without free will science fails. With free will, science must accept something that it can not explain, even in principle 100%.

At least a scientist must admit that there is something that provides for free will and is inaccessable at least in its entirety to scientific explanation. You can explain HOW free will is possible in the universe, and predict human behavior probablistically, but you can not explain why a given person makes a given choice, or even really mechanically HOW.

[/quote]

When quoting posts with a Youtube link, hit Enter/Return between the start of the end quote tag and the end of the link to make the quote function work properly.

79

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< God is nowhere to be found in reality. God is only found hidden in the wishes, fears and desires of those who believe. >>>[/quote]God is the ULTIMATE and only uncontingent reality and hence one cannot even discuss whether he is found or not without already assuming Him. The scorn of sinners praises His name.

I didn’t forget about your question from the previous page.

80

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< God is nowhere to be found in reality. God is only found hidden in the wishes, fears and desires of those who believe. >>>[/quote]God is the ULTIMATE and only uncontingent reality and hence one cannot even discuss whether he is found or not without already assuming Him. The scorn of sinners praises His name.

I didn’t forget about your question from the previous page.
[/quote]

You know this how?

Emotion <> Evidence

Your emotional experience is no more a reflection of reality than the emotional experiences of others whose beliefs fundamentally contradict yours.

It’s nice that it provides you comfort, structure, and direction…but so do their beliefs, and it doesn’t mean it’s real.