|
Author
|
Topic: Philosophy 101
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 9 of 190 (606153)
02-24-2011 12:08 AM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM
|
|
Watchmaker in the Dungeon
Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense? or does philosophy provide us with the foundations on which science and society are formed? I would say a bit of both. And how did you come to this conclusion? Edited by Jon, : No reason given.
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 48 of 190 (606323)
02-24-2011 7:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 13 by Straggler
02-24-2011 3:22 AM
|
|
Re: Watchmaker in the Dungeon
Jon writes: And how did you come to this conclusion? Philosophically? The "real" kind or the "post-modern drivel" kind?
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 13 by Straggler, posted 02-24-2011 3:22 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 80 of 190 (606438)
02-25-2011 1:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 78 by Straggler
02-25-2011 12:57 PM
|
|
Re: Empiricism.....?
Well surely the approximately spherical (on any navigational scale) existence of the Earth lies at the basis of that. If the Earth were actually a cube we wouldn't impose the same co-ordinate system upon it would we? So (with regard to your example) at root lies the observed reality of the shape of the planet Earth. No? What does that have to do with the point nwr was making?
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by Straggler, posted 02-25-2011 12:57 PM | | Straggler has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 83 by Straggler, posted 02-25-2011 1:38 PM | | Jon has seen this message but not replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 81 of 190 (606440)
02-25-2011 1:22 PM
|
Reply to: Message 53 by Straggler
02-25-2011 7:06 AM
|
|
Re: Jonosiphy
I hope this clarifies things. Not in the least.
Feel free to ask further questions if necessary. I don't need to; there's still the previous one that remains unaddressed. I've a feeling you're not interested in an honest attempt, though. Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 53 by Straggler, posted 02-25-2011 7:06 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 102 of 190 (606524)
02-25-2011 11:35 PM
|
Reply to: Message 84 by Straggler
02-25-2011 1:42 PM
|
|
Re: Jonosiphy
Jon writes: I've a feeling you're not interested in an honest attempt, though. Straggler writes: [Blah Blah...] Guess I was right: no honest attempt desired. Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 84 by Straggler, posted 02-25-2011 1:42 PM | | Straggler has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 103 by Straggler, posted 02-26-2011 2:09 AM | | Jon has seen this message but not replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
Re: Scientific Theories Vs Arbitrary Conventions
If scientific theories were descriptions of methods instead of descriptions of the world, they wouldn't be able to make accurate predictions about the world - just about methods. Perhaps you can show that they do make accurate predictions about the 'world', and not just about the 'method'; or even show how the 'world' according to science exists in anyway independent of the 'method'. Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 107 by Straggler, posted 02-26-2011 8:53 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 124 of 190 (606606)
02-26-2011 11:07 PM
|
Reply to: Message 120 by Straggler
02-26-2011 4:53 PM
|
|
Re: Scientific Theories Vs Arbitrary Conventions
What's special about an eclipse? How does your 'answer' address my challenge to you?
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 120 by Straggler, posted 02-26-2011 4:53 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 128 of 190 (606633)
02-27-2011 11:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 126 by Straggler
02-27-2011 3:31 AM
|
|
Re: Scientific Theories Vs Arbitrary Conventions
Jon writes: What's special about an eclipse? Have you ever seen a really good one? They're neat; sure. But so what?
Well an eclipse is a predictable natural event. Are you sure? Is an eclipse really an 'event' at all? Do 'events' even exist outside of our ability and capacity to define them? Can we witness an eclipse without use of the observational methodologies so central to the scientific method?
So Jon do you agree with nwr that "Scientific theories have nothing to say about how nature behaves." All religious theories are 100% accurate reflections of reality. In fact, religion's sole purpose is in describing the behavior of nature, which it does exceptionally well. Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 126 by Straggler, posted 02-27-2011 3:31 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 129 of 190 (606634)
02-27-2011 11:19 AM
|
Reply to: Message 127 by Straggler
02-27-2011 3:36 AM
|
|
Re: Scientific Theories Vs Arbitrary Conventions
And then there is political and moral philosophy....... Now there's some useless drivel!
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 127 by Straggler, posted 02-27-2011 3:36 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
Re: Scientific Theories Vs Arbitrary Conventions
In plain English you seem to be asking if we can observe an eclipse without observing one. No, we can't. What of it? Observation is at the heart of the scientific method. To witness an eclipse, we must make certain scientific observations: note the position of the Sun relative to us, note the position of the Moon relative to the Sun and us, etc. We apply reasoning to these observations to form a conclusion: Moon in front of Sun; Sun gone for a while. If we predicted an eclipse, but never followed through with the observational methodologies required to confirm or refute our prediction, we couldn't confirm or refute our prediction. Thus, the full working of science hinges on repeated observationobservational methodologies. Our prediction is made on the basis of observation; our prediction is tested on the basis of observation; our prediction is confirmed or refuted on the basis of observation. Observation is a key component of the methodology of science. When we predict an eclipse, all we're really predicting is our future use of the methodour future observation. No? Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
Oh Get Over Yourself... Jeesh
If scientific theories have nothing to say about how nature behaves then how are scientific theories able to yield accurate and reliable predictions regarding the behaviour of nature? Of course if you could demonstrate that scientific theories are capable of making predictions about the behavior of nature, then you might have an argument in incessantly asking that worn-out question. Until then, you're just being, as nwr would say, a bully.
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 144 by Straggler, posted 03-16-2011 5:30 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 151 of 190 (609186)
03-17-2011 11:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 150 by Straggler
03-17-2011 6:41 AM
|
|
The Point
... is still missed.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 150 by Straggler, posted 03-17-2011 6:41 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 154 of 190 (609195)
03-17-2011 12:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 153 by Taz
03-17-2011 11:52 AM
|
|
Re: "Scientific theories have nothing to say about how nature behaves"
But then you gotta accept other body parts of philosophy, which consist of nonsense. Of course one needn't do any such thing.
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 153 by Taz, posted 03-17-2011 11:52 AM | | Taz has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 155 by Taz, posted 03-17-2011 12:11 PM | | Jon has replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 156 of 190 (609204)
03-17-2011 1:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 155 by Taz
03-17-2011 12:11 PM
|
|
You CAN Have One without the Other
Actually, for the sake of consistency, you do. I can't stand here and say I'm pro-gay marriage but anti-polygamy. Of course you could; consistency has nothing to do with it.
In the same way, I can't say I'm pro-material science but anti-evolutionary theory. False analogy.
If you accept some parts of philosophy, then you gotta take in all the nonsensical stuff. Nope.
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 155 by Taz, posted 03-17-2011 12:11 PM | | Taz has not replied |
|
Jon
Inactive Member
|
Re: The Point
Perhaps you could explain this to me, instead of to Straggler? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Straggler's examples all support his point. You have no such examples that I can see. Imagine I'm in grade school. Dumb it down to the bottom. Show me, Jon. What is the point you are trying to make? Is this still semantics? What do a concept of a dog and a concept of a god have in common? Jon
Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 158 by xongsmith, posted 03-17-2011 2:19 PM | | xongsmith has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2