|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Peanut Gallery | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
No, he does not have a theory.
Parts 1 through 4 of the agreed on process apply to the formation and testing of a scientific hypothesis. At best he has a scientific hypothesis, if he can show the evidence that supports his formulation. Even then his hypothesis is not tested., ergo NOT a theory. QED
{BTW mods, although I've read on RAZDs posts that participants in GBs have been asked to keep of the peanut gallery, it isn't actually true in my case - no-one has asked me - so, please don't consider this an infringement until I am asked. } Message 121Could the performers from the Is My Hypothesis Valid??? thread take their discussion back to that thread? The peanut gallery is intended for onlookers, not participants. I know it's fun when actors roam out into the audience, but there's a limit. Thanks! Message 963The "Peanut Gallery" topic is intended for side discussion for members not part of a one-on-one "Great Debate". Message 1Those wishing to comment on the Great Debate between RAZD and Petrophysics taking place in the Evidence (RAZD and Petrophysics only) thread should post their messages here. The participants in the Evidence (RAZD and Petrophysics only) Great Debate thread, RAZD and Petrophysics, are specifically excluded from posting here. ALL of which I take to be a general requests for GD participants to stay out of the Peanut Gallery. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
** analemma is a word i made up to capture the essence of a lemma with the nuance of an analogue with undertones of antagonism meant in a friendly way. True, it is also the figure-8 shape of something like the sun photographed around a whole year from the same spot in a backyard by many amateur astronomers. This is a good coincidence, because it resonates with the circularity of this whole subject of supernaturalness. We go around in repetition all the time with these things. Think of a mobius Yin/Yang snake-eating-its-tail Klein Bottle thingy. The sidewise figure eight, ∞, is also the symbol for infinity . . . which is probably how long it will take . . . Enjoy by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi xongsmith,
You're getting there, slowly, certainly closer than anyone else.
Message 1220: Any objective scientific evidence of any phenomena will be always explained as a natural process and never be explained as a supernatural process. The only known scientific explanation of any phenomenon is a natural explanation. ... By inductive reasoning, this analemma predicts that any future verified scientific explanation accepted by the scientific community will always be a natural explanation. There will never be a supernatural explanation. Message 1222: By inductive reasoning, this analemma predicts that any future verified scientific explanation accepted by the scientific community will always be a natural explanation. There will never be a supernatural explanation. This means your theory cannot be falsified.
Message 1226: Here is your own opening statement in Message 167:
It is falsified by the demonstration of the existence of just one supernatural being beyond all reasonable doubt. This will NEVER happen according to my analemma, which you, yourself, have concluded is a "strong" theory (unlike me in my modest persona). Aside from the issue of whether "beyond all reasonable doubt" means that bluegenes can dismiss anything that doesn't fit with his worldview, your point is that nothing will be viewed as a supernatural occurrence, that anything seen will be explained by natural means ... or dismissed as not having enough evidence to explain it by natural means ... leaving any such evidence to be dismissed as "god of the gaps" rather than supernatural. This leads us to something that necessarily cannot be explained and that can be shown to be impossible to explain by natural means. This last element is not possible in science, so the "test" cannot be done. Enjoy ps - I am posting here because bluegenes has chosen to post here: if admin wants to sanction me then both of us should be sanctioned. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Why don't you just participate in the actual Great debate in question? And if you don't want to but Xong thinks he has a case why doesn't he take over? I have. I've demonstrated that there is no theory, not in the scientific usage of the term. I've been waiting for one piece of actual evidence from the supposed great extravagance of objective empirical evidence. I've been waiting to see how one tests for falsification - the methodology. Something more than wishful thinking coupled with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. I've been waiting for honest debate of the LACK of support for the concept to be anything other than a conjecture, rather than pseudoskepticism and bluster. Curiously, I am not the only one who sees the failure in bluegenes posts. Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : scientific by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Given that RAZ has abandoned the thread ... Look again o great leaper to concussions ... ... and I was under the impression that bluegenes had abandoned the debate, not having a scintilla of evidence that actually supports his conjecture. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi xongsmith,
This will NEVER happen according to my analemma, which you, yourself, have concluded is a "strong" theory (unlike me in my modest persona).
Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Chuck77,
Basically bluegenes is taking a philosophical approach to the whole supernatural thing BUT he is asking that it be falsified by a real SB. Rather convienient isn't it? That's how pseudoskeptics work -- you must prove your points and disprove theirs, and they don't present evidence to substantiate their claims. Amusingly bluegenes was shown to be a pseudoskeptic (as was straggles) on a previous thread, so this is no small surprise to any open minded skeptic.
Of course bluegenes has not even come close to this process but expects for doubters of his "theory" to produce a real god(s) to falsify this thingy he calls a theory. In a nutshell, Chuck77. Enjoy by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi AZPaul3
The theory that supernatural phenomena are the result of human imagination and invention has been evidenced to a great extent by both indirect (the lack of obvious supernatural causation) and direct (in psychology, neuroscience, etc.) evidence. I'm curious to know the methodology by which they eliminate the possibility of supernatural effect on the mind. Certainly if you cannot determine whether or not such effect exists, then you are just assuming that it isn't in effect rather than demonstrating it. I asked subbie if he could think of a test to see if a religious experience was real or a product of imagination, and he could not think of one.
[qs]The persistent question of evidence (RAZD and subbie only)(RAZD and subbie only)[/color] Message 22:
* If the only means of communication between humans (or any intelligent organism, we don't have to be the "chosen" species) is via religious experiences, where the experience occurs within the mind, then can you suggest some means to test whether this is actually happening or being imagined? Can we test for imagination versus actual religious experiences? Nothing comes immediately to mind.[/qs] Can you tell me:
Enjoy by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Mod
It isn't eliminated. so it's just assumed to be imagination then?
Can you explain why such a vague claim needs to be eliminated by the skeptics rather than supported by its proposers? Simple. If the skeptics are claiming that it is imagination rather than a real experience, then they need to support that claim. The is the heart of the issue about pseudoskepticism:
Pseudoskepticism and logic msg 1: Pseudoskepticism - Wikipedia
quote: bold added for emphasis. This is especially true if the skeptics are claiming to take a scientific approach, rather than just make a statement of belief (as the "vague" claimants have), in my not so humble opinion. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi again AZPaul,
Why should anyone assume there are supernatural effects on the mind? Simple. If one is making the hypothetical claim that the religious experiences are products of human imagination, then one would need to develop a falsification test that would include positing such supernatural effects -- particularly if one is claiming to apply science to the question.
One piece of evidence that impacts this discussion is this: The Orientation/Association area in the brain appears to be a controlling site for deep religious experiences, out-of-body experiences and "voices" from "beyond". Decrease the blood flow to the OAA and religious euphoria, out-of-body views and "voices" are reported by the patients as observed results. Increase the blood flow to this area and those feelings cease. Overview article in Psychology Today Deep meditation or prayer can cause such a change in blood flow to this area. This shows a direct relationship between at least some "supernatural" experiences and blood flow to areas of the brain. All naturally occurring, like an on/off switch, under personal and medical intervention control. One test, as Newberg, et al. show, is to medically intervene in a religious experience by increasing the blood flow to the OAA thus shutting down the experience. Great, you've explained the mechanism involved, but this does not show that there is in fact no supernatural effect, just how it could work. In particular I note that "Deep meditation or prayer can cause such a change in blood flow to this area" can mean that this is the mechanism that opens the channels to the religious experience - that the effect can be consciously and intentionally instigated. Certainly this does not show that the experience is necessarily imagination.
If you are going to posit some woo-woo entity that sticks its finger in the blood vessels ... So, in effect you just assume that it is imagination, rather than actually demonstrate it. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Michael
RAZD writes: It would be nice if you could provide a link to the previous thread so that we can check the veracity of your statement. Amusingly bluegenes was shown to be a pseudoskeptic (as was straggles) on a previous thread, so this is no small surprise to any open minded skeptic. No problem, see Pseudoskepticism and logic and note that anyone that claimed to be a 6 (or higher) and did not present any objective empirical evidence to substantiate that view qualifies as a pseudoskeptic, whether the issue is gods or whatever. Enjoy. ps -- the Dawkins scale was originally mentioned, however due to inherent problems with the wording of it, I have made some modifications to better describe the spectrum of belief:
Where the logically invalid positions need to be validated\substantiated by objective empirical evidence. I can also show you the logical analysis if you like. I'm a 3, btw. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Straggles,
But why would anyone give any of them serious rational consideration? Because you are claiming they are imagination instead, and dismiss them without any consideration rather than actually test them. Do you know of any branch of science that just dismisses possible invalidating phenomena without testing? You can only arrive at a natural explanations when you a priori exclude non-natural explanations. Thus you are assuming the consequent.
No. It is the most evidenced conclusion. And yet, curiously, you still fail to present even a scintilla of such overwhelming objective empirical evidence? Amusingly it appears to be the most assumed conclusion by those who want to believe it. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Panda
This adds support to BG's theory. Thanks for providing it. What theory is that? Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Panda,
If you are having trouble remembering what you are talking about, you can scroll up and read the previous posts. Curiuosly, I am not aware that BG has a theory. So far all I've seen is a wishful thinking conjecture unsupported by any real testing or objective empirical evidence. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Mod
No, it is theorised to be imagination. Ah, so then you have a methodology to test for supernatural effect as part of the process, a means by which you can identify experiences due to imagination and those due to supernatural phenomena. Because supernatural phenomena would invalidate the hypothesis. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024