Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Icelander]
    #11610730 -

Icelander said:
How do you know that you are not in that situation? If you are insane your claims would be meaningless.



I know my mind and I know the facts of my circumstance. You are implying that one cannot trust ones mind, senses or the facts of reality. That Sir is irrational.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610757 -

Take a trip to a psychiatric ward, and you would be surprised at how many of the patients know they are sane.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610769 -

I know my mind and I know the facts of my circumstance through observation. You are implying that one cannot trust ones mind, senses or the facts of reality. That Sir is irrational.


:rofl2: But if you are delusional and insane you might well think yourself perfectly sane which the insane sometimes do. If you are observing a delusional mind state then you could not know what was real. Once again there is know way to ultimately know. You could be dreaming this whole thing like many who believe their dreams until they awaken. Are you the butterfly that dreams he's a man or a man who dreams he's a butterfly.

Your posts here immediately bring to mind fundamentalists who claim that god speaks to them internally so they know he is real.:lol:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610772 -

And yet everyone who has committed evil, attempting to do some good, believed to some extent they knew their own mind, and the facts of their circumstances.

Reminds me of Alcibiades II


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Icelander]
    #11610811 -

Well, you don't get to sneak in an unfounded assumption, that my good Sir is the beauty of reason.

Your posts immediately bring to mind fundamentalism. I hear all the time from fundamentalists the argument of

"How do you know there isn't a God?"

But, good Sir, the burden of 'proof' is on you to prove that reality is not what it is, that A is Not A, that things are not how they appear. I cannot prove a negative and should never be called upon to do so. There is no proof that I am anywhere other than here typing this post in reality with my mind fully concious of the fact.

Do you not see how your argument is identical to how fundamentalists bring their indoctrination to the table. First they try to make you doubt your mind, then they try to make you doubt reality, then you are ripe for the full indoctrination process.

It's ironic that you would try to insinuate that I am the one being a fundamentalist for seeing the self-evident fact that reality exists and that my conciousness is capable of knowing it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610833 -

I'm not assuming anything. I provided a scenario where a person thinking themselves to be making perfect sense might well not. It happens in psychiatric wards and on the streets and if it can happen to a human it is possible for it to happen to any human. Simple.

IMO to be fully sure of what the brain is capable of  one would have to be the creator of that brain and have complete control and understanding of all it's functioning under all conditions.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Icelander]
    #11610912 -

So what exactly is your question getting at? Are you try8ing to say we can never know anything 'for sure'? Thats nonsense.

Crazy people sometimes do not make sense and think to themselves that they do, sure, but reality is the testing ground of sense. Two people can have an argument, but reality will present who is right, or whether either of them are right. We can look at history for many examples of this.

Take for instance the argument between two great inventors, Edison and Tesla. Who was right in the end? Tesla. Why, because his argument was conducive with reality and that is why the power-lines outside your house run on AC current and not DC.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610959 -

Quote:
There is no proof that I am anywhere other than here typing this post in reality with my mind fully concious of the fact.


I don't think the question is whether reality exists, but what the nature of it is. As you might admit in another context, a person who believes things are simply as they appear, is foolish.

Yet, to be at a lack of an answer, can be quite liberating if the answer is not known. Of course you are typing your posts. But, who are you trying to help? By your own words, you are the one who is sick.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11610967 -

I'm not talking about how things should go in a healthy situation. I'm a big believer in using what I consider logical thinking.

Once again I gave a scenario where someone could be in a delusional state and yet think themselves to be making logical sense. Especially if they were also hallucinating.

That's all I wanted to establish. Nothing is 100% sure. We are not the creator of reality and so cannot know everything that is possible in said reality.:shrug:

But like I said. I think, I look at apparent evidence. I evaluate. I decide. But I know there is a tiny chance there is something I'm not able to take into account. But it's not likely I'm wrong considering the evidence so I proceed. :satansmoking:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Icelander]
    #11610982 -

RationalEgo said:
To question the self-evident is ridiculous, that is why no person who is an intellectual would do so. An 'intellectual' who relies upon reason, facts and evidence for the formation and integration of concepts and debates in a rational manner thus.

Certainty is either/or. You are either certain, or you are not.



To question the self-evident is ridiculous? What do you mean?

So to you reason and truth cannot be evaluated/critiqued/questioned, at all? There is an ideal out there, reason/truth, that is off limits for examining coldly... hmmmm...

Would it make you nauseous to have the value of truth examined?


--------------------
Jesus loves you.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: andrewss]
    #11611583 -

my contribution is "all words, no proof"

as in "you can't have proof of something in the mind, in my honest opinion"

Edited by akira_akuma (12/08/09 06:09 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: RationalEgo]
    #11611762 -

What you need is a nice healthy psychotic break, so you'll stop trusting yourself as if you're the One. :rolleyes:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #11611778 -

or at least stop confusing yourself with other people and other peolpe for yourself. good luck

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: akira_akuma]
    #11612053 -

RationalEgo, you have made several errors.

1. Just because a scientific model produces technology does not mean that the model represents reality. Results do not verify any model.

2. You say certainty is either 100% or 0%. This is true only because certainty is self defined this way, but if you look at the actual psychological process of belief, or if you look at a logical construction of belief it is not limited this way. You can have an intuitive sense of how likely something is to be true, and you can also have a statistical understanding of how likely something is to be true.

3. Saying, "I do not believe in god" is not the same as saying, "I believe there is no god". As you clearly point out, you cannot prove a negative, so it is absurd to believe there is no god. While through semantics you may believe that believing a negative is impossible, in the realm of the mind this happens all the time. As I once pointed out to you, I believe there are no ham sandwiches in my pants.

Lastly, please explain how it is possible to have 100% certainty about something. You've seen the Matrix right? Ever here about Chuang Tzu's butterfly dream?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Freedom]
    #11612093 -


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Freedom]
    #11612137 -

Freedom said:
1. Just because a scientific model produces technology does not mean that the model represents reality. Results do not verify any model.



In the philosophical sense science does not produce technology, it produces the models you mention.  Engineering is what makes technology.

But what I really wanted to say is - Of course results can verify a model.  Why couldn't they?  If I model the earth as a roughly spherical shape and do some experiments they verify that.  It need not be 100% true to be verified, if the results of an experiment are consistent with a model then that experiment verifies the model.  That fact that error bars exist does not negate this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #11612227 -

Oweyervishice said:



:thumbup:


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #11612243 -

Oweyervishice said:



exactly

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: DieCommie]
    #11612255 -

DieCommie said:
Freedom said:
1. Just because a scientific model produces technology does not mean that the model represents reality. Results do not verify any model.



In the philosophical sense science does not produce technology, it produces the models you mention.  Engineering is what makes technology.

But what I really wanted to say is - Of course results can verify a model.  Why couldn't they?  If I model the earth as a roughly spherical shape and do some experiments they verify that.  It need not be 100% true to be verified, if the results of an experiment are consistent with a model then that experiment verifies the model.  That fact that error bars exist does not negate this.



I mean verifying that something is reality, not just a good model of reality. Newton modeled reality and that led to all sorts of technology even though the model was shown to be flawed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Verifiable Truth and Proof Vs Post-Modern Nonsense [Re: Freedom]
    #11612291 -

Flawed?  Thats a little harsh, it does describes a subset of observations.  In fact millions of people still study classical mechanics because it is both useful and properly descriptive. 

I agree with your distinction, between 'representing' reality and 'is' reality.  Better to say the models describe observations I think.  Who gives a fuck about reality.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Official Truth Thread - No jokes please!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )		 World Spirit 20,008 178 10/31/02 12:23 AM
by Strumpling
* truth?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 deep_umbra 5,838 66 05/21/02 09:12 AM
by Anonymous
* What is the Truth?
( 1 2 3 all )		 andrash 3,940 43 01/24/03 03:42 PM
by Anonymous
* Burden of Proof
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Sclorch 8,090 81 01/16/03 05:22 PM
by Sclorch
* Truth?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )		 Anonymous 17,621 205 10/21/02 02:08 PM
by Anonymous
* Al Haq (The Truth)
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Zahid 7,021 60 08/24/02 03:17 PM
by Danimal
* "Sometimes truth defies reason"
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 thePatient 12,823 144 09/23/02 10:46 PM
by Anonymous
* absolute proof, sorry to all the catholics out the
( 1 2 3 all )		 ArchDruid 5,980 52 01/04/02 02:50 AM
by WaktSniper

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,745 topic views. 1 members, 211 guests and 24 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 17 queries.