|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,691
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: Mrbobster]
#14554163 - 06/03/11 03:19 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Hey mr. bobster dude, your shouting doesn't contribute to the readability nor the credibility of your rantings. This one is very much at place here: 
Now for the real stuff. Good to see that the discussion on the theory of theory is progressing nicely. I think Inner_Eye deserves some credit here, for not only sticking by his point, but also defending it with much more ardor and clarity than I had previously imagined possible. A heartfelt kudos for that! And for the other discussants who have continued to discuss the subject more or less (and luckily not too much) seriously. At this point, I would like to make an observation. Inner_Eye, you provide a good illustration of what you call a 'law'; and law is colloquially being defined here as 'theory verified through (scientific) observation'. There is a philosophical problem underneath here, which makes it difficult to move from theory to law with complete certainty. That problem relates to the ability of humans to make and interpret observations. We're straying quite far from the original discussion here, of which I'm fully aware, but from the onset of the theory vs. reality debate, it has in my mind been the essential loophole that could have been used to debunk any theory, law or scientific fact regardless of its actual content. The problem is that there is no reliable way to verify our observations. Yes, we can triangulate, by employing several observants, by devising several experiments or measurements, and by interpreting the results along different conceptual frameworks, but there is still one potential, single point of failure: the shortcomings of the human mind, which we are incapable of analyzing unless we manage to put considerable distance between us and our human-ness, which in itself is an interesting paradox. And perhaps the point where psychedelics come in. But I digress. To illustrate my point, consider the very hypothetical possibility that despite all our triangulation and repeated verification of repeated experiments involving repeated measurements, we are all collectively flawed to the point of being delusional. Not mass hysteria, but mass delusion. I think it is this possibility, which is to my knowledge impossible to exclude, which makes it impossible for us to ever move beyond the realm of theory and into the realm of actual, unadulterated Truth.
TL;DR: I just said in a very roundabout way that in all probability, I am a constructivist.
|
The Inner Eye



Registered: 06/20/10
Posts: 1,151
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: koraks]
#14554377 - 06/03/11 06:15 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Hey mr. bobster dude, your shouting doesn't contribute to the readability nor the credibility of your rantings. This one is very much at place here: 
Now for the real stuff. Good to see that the discussion on the theory of theory is progressing nicely. I think Inner_Eye deserves some credit here, for not only sticking by his point, but also defending it with much more ardor and clarity than I had previously imagined possible. A heartfelt kudos for that! And for the other discussants who have continued to discuss the subject more or less (and luckily not too much) seriously. At this point, I would like to make an observation. Inner_Eye, you provide a good illustration of what you call a 'law'; and law is colloquially being defined here as 'theory verified through (scientific) observation'. There is a philosophical problem underneath here, which makes it difficult to move from theory to law with complete certainty. That problem relates to the ability of humans to make and interpret observations. We're straying quite far from the original discussion here, of which I'm fully aware, but from the onset of the theory vs. reality debate, it has in my mind been the essential loophole that could have been used to debunk any theory, law or scientific fact regardless of its actual content. The problem is that there is no reliable way to verify our observations. Yes, we can triangulate, by employing several observants, by devising several experiments or measurements, and by interpreting the results along different conceptual frameworks, but there is still one potential, single point of failure: the shortcomings of the human mind, which we are incapable of analyzing unless we manage to put considerable distance between us and our human-ness, which in itself is an interesting paradox. And perhaps the point where psychedelics come in. But I digress. To illustrate my point, consider the very hypothetical possibility that despite all our triangulation and repeated verification of repeated experiments involving repeated measurements, we are all collectively flawed to the point of being delusional. Not mass hysteria, but mass delusion. I think it is this possibility, which is to my knowledge impossible to exclude, which makes it impossible for us to ever move beyond the realm of theory and into the realm of actual, unadulterated Truth.
TL;DR: I just said in a very roundabout way that in all probability, I am a constructivist.
HAHAHA Koraks! Sounds to me like you are discrediting all of science! Who is sounding religious now! J/K man. You bring up a very good point. Its interesting to me that science relies a little more on faith then we have given it credit for in the past. For having these laws and scientific truths, we place an awful lot of faith on the scientific method. In the same sense 5 million years from now, if the earth is still around it will (in theory) be consumed by the Andromeda galaxy and Cassini's Scientific Law will be shattered, as the moon will no longer orbit the earth. All planets will be flung light years away from eachother in a very chaotic fashion (in theory).
So my question is, After chaotic events such as The Big Bang (Theory/Idea) are certain scientific truths ultimately shattered, showing the inffectiveness of labeling something as law/scientific truth in our chaotic galaxy?
The old saying comes to mind - Change is the only constant. -
Very interesting topic and I am glad for all of your observations. Im sorry OP, as I feel we have drifted into left field with the topic.
I am in awe of your non-native english skills Koraks..
btw what is TL;DR?
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,691
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: The Inner Eye]
#14554389 - 06/03/11 06:29 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Well, I'm not so much discrediting science, I just explore the boundaries of the scientific system using my limited insight into philosophy. Ultimately that's the message I want to convey: it's alright to take most of what science purports for granted, but one should always remain critical of its limits. Humans are fallible, science is a product of mankind, and therefore, science is not almighty. But like democracy, science pretty much 'the best of the worst' of the systems that can help us deal with reality. Regardless of whether this 'reality' is a construct or an absolute truth.
|
Simms
Fuckwit


Registered: 11/17/08
Posts: 1,109
Loc: Somewhere in Europe
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: Mrbobster]
#14554805 - 06/03/11 09:45 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mrbobster said:
Quote:
Simms said: Is such thing possible?
We know people are very able to kill the enviornment, but yesterday I came to a thought, what if plants were too.
Are there, for example, such parasitic or self multiplying plants that turn the enviornment unsuitable to most other lifeforms? Is such plant life theoretically and logically possible?
For example, there could be very well a plant that grows everywhere, eventually destroying every other plant life, and since it is too poisonous (like emitting nerve gas to prevent animal life from eating and adapting to it), no-one will eat it and life will eventually die.
Could such thing happen due to some mutation?
WHAAT DUDE...!!!*** DONT THEM MASHROOMS MAKE U FEEL LIKE ALL IS CONNECTED.... tECHNICALLY IT ALL IS, COMINg DOWN TO ATOMS AND WHATs INSIDE THEM, SO IF ALL IS CONNECTED THERE HAS TO BE A GREATER FORCE TAKING CARE OF HIS CREATION, A KING, A FATHER, A CREATOR, A PROTECTOR, A PROVIDER..... So if there will me any mutation like that it will be the cause of one man or a group of people's Devilish work in to harming our society like the milk and chicken industry in America today..! """"Woooh TO Organic food''''''
If a new object or a machine, which no one in the world has ever seen or heard of before, is shown to an atheist or any person and then a question is asked, " Who is the first person who will be able to provide details of the mechanism of this unknown object? After little bit of thinking, he will reply, ‘the creator of that object.’ Some may say ‘the producer’ while others may say ‘the manufacturer.’ What ever answer the person gives, keep it in your mind, the answer will always be either the creator, the producer, the manufacturer or some what of the same meaning, i.e. the person who has made it or created it. Don’t grapple with words, whatever answer he gives, the meaning will be same, therefore accept it.
The methods of proving the existence of God with usage of the material provided in the ‘Concept of God in Islam’ to an atheist may satisfy some but not all. Many atheists demand a scientific proof for the existence of God. I agree that today is the age of science and technology. Let us use scientific knowledge to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. to prove the existence of God and simultaneously prove that the One and only Holy Book in the World Today!!!*** is a revelation of God.
ask to find out


You with your religions and all this theory and law talk is making me think of Godwins Law.
However.
A Law, a Fact can also be dispruven very quiclkly, like a theory. It is in my belief that fact is still a theory. Like many of you said, law is proven theory, therefore, it is a theory.
Now, if proven theory faces a contradiction, it can, and is, often called exception in theory, which calls for correction of theory. But the theory in general is still right if the fundamentals are not disproven.
However.
A fact is something very abstract. Do you KNOW that earth is round, that Moon is real, or you BELIEVE it? Just like many peaople believe/know the existence of God.
However.
If we take it as the basic material, that the world is made of, is INFORMATION, then everything is basically a theory. Piece of information can be true or false. But in such abstract world, what means true or false? If a piece of information is true, and everything exists of information, how can it be true or false at all? True or false depends on the correloation between other objects of true or false, that make up the laws of physics and the world as we know. Therefore the world in very basic levels, can be very chaotic indeed.
--------------------
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,691
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: Simms]
#14554826 - 06/03/11 09:53 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Exactly. That's why we resort to the safety of science and its tendency to accept some things at some point as essentially true or false. Paradoxically, humans are ill-equipped to deal with complexity, chaos and an ever-changing environment. So we build a framework of concepts and relationships that we agree is true. Somewhere deep down inside we know that this is a convention, and not necessarily an accurate model of this elusive Reality which we try to capture and understand. And it is exactly that underlying spark of uncertainty that people (scientists) tend to respond vigorously and sometimes even aggressively when someone comes along and draws into doubt the whole construction of concepts and relationships that science has built over time. At least, that's how I feel about it.
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!



Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,141
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 5 hours, 57 minutes
|
Re: Plants that could kill the enviornment [Re: koraks]
#14559462 - 06/04/11 10:24 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Log in to view attachment
^
-------------------- -------------------------------- Mp3 of the month: The Fe-Fi-Four Plus 2 - I Wanna Come Back (From the World of LSD)
|
|