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

Kratom Eye
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 |  [ show all ]
The Ten Dogmas of Science
    #19628649 -

Interesting TEDx talk for PS&P's benefit and discussion.

The 10 Dogmas Of Science

-That nature is mechanical.
-That matter is unconscious.
-The laws of nature are fixed.
-The totally amount of matter and energy are always the same.
-That nature is purposeless.
-Biological inheritance is material.
-That memories are stored as material traces.
-The mind is in the brain.
-Telepathy and other psychic phenomena are illusory.
-Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that really works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zamrs3nE9ys


--------------------
My solitude...
My shield...
My armour...

TESTED
WITH
FULL
FORCE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: circastes]
    #19628679 -

A bit to partisan for me. Nature is also energetic. Some matter is conscious, otherwise point two contradicts point one. Scientists -vs- Mystics. :cheer:


--------------------
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: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: circastes]
    #19629145 -

That doesn't sound like TED at all. I'll have to watch that video sometime soon.


--------------------
"It is the peculiar quality of a fool to perceive the faults of others and forget his own." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

"A room without books is like a body without a soul."  - Marcus Tullius Cicero

"Do not bite at the bait of pleasure, till you know there is no hook beneath it." -Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: dustinthewind13]
    #19629279 -

TED is not a person
and half of those dogmas are not scientific, i.e. based upon experimental evidence, nor even formulated in a way to be fairly experimented upon.

sounds like a meeting of Scottish scientists in 1879


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: redgreenvines]
    #19629281 -

TED isn't a person!? That just broke my heart man. :sad:


--------------------
"It is the peculiar quality of a fool to perceive the faults of others and forget his own." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

"A room without books is like a body without a soul."  - Marcus Tullius Cicero

"Do not bite at the bait of pleasure, till you know there is no hook beneath it." -Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: circastes] * 2
    #19629290 -

Science doesn't have "dogmas".
A dogma is:

Quote:
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology, nationalism or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. They can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]


To think science has dogmas is to misunderstand the scientific method.
Unlike religion and most people's steadfast beliefs, science can and does change when new evidence comes along and supports it. Some things are true because they have been proved true through mathematics or observation. Until evidence comes along then mathematics is invalid / what we observe is invalid then these will stay as scientific truths.

Can we stop throwing around the "science has dogmas" b.s anytime soon? It just makes you look uneducated.


--------------------
:brainondrugs:

You are not special :haha:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Cyclohexylamine]
    #19629295 -

Yes, because everyone knows the climate scientists would never use the dogma of global warming to the advantage of their masters who grant them money to do their "research".  Oh wait we come to find out they did do just that!  Crap.  So much for the scientists supposedly independent from the big money and being honest instead of on the A list.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #19629309 -

LunarEclipse said:
Yes, because everyone knows the climate scientists would never use the dogma of global warming to the advantage of their masters who grant them money to do their "research".  Oh wait we come to find out they did do just that!  Crap.  So much for the scientists supposedly independent from the big money and being honest instead of on the A list.


How is global warming a "dogma"?
Using the definition above, please explain.


--------------------
:brainondrugs:

You are not special :haha:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Cyclohexylamine]
    #19629321 -

tymoteusz3 said:
LunarEclipse said:
Yes, because everyone knows the climate scientists would never use the dogma of global warming to the advantage of their masters who grant them money to do their "research".  Oh wait we come to find out they did do just that!  Crap.  So much for the scientists supposedly independent from the big money and being honest instead of on the A list.


How is global warming a "dogma"?
Using the definition above, please explain.


It's a dogma when the cause of it is dumped on human activity by the scientists so that the EPA can agree and humans can then be taxed.  Which is what is happening and will continue to happen.  All contingent upon rising CO2 levels with no real proof that is the cause of the global warming.  But they need to blame humans and their activity, make it official and tax it.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Cyclohexylamine]
    #19629353 -

tymoteusz3 said:
Science doesn't have "dogmas".
A dogma is:

Quote:
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology, nationalism or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. They can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]


To think science has dogmas is to misunderstand the scientific method.
Unlike religion and most people's steadfast beliefs, science can and does change when new evidence comes along and supports it. Some things are true because they have been proved true through mathematics or observation. Until evidence comes along then mathematics is invalid / what we observe is invalid then these will stay as scientific truths.

Can we stop throwing around the "science has dogmas" b.s anytime soon? It just makes you look uneducated.


Materialism is scientism revisited. Sheldrake is right, these are common misconception of atheist. Why do you think these same ideas and concepts revolve around these views as ultimate fact? Many people like to take all the specific evidence we have for things as evidence of all there is.

I don't see why they deleted it, it is good to consider our own bias as well as others. If you only consider your own, you get a lopsided view.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: teknix]
    #19629476 -

LunarEclipse said:
tymoteusz3 said:
LunarEclipse said:
Yes, because everyone knows the climate scientists would never use the dogma of global warming to the advantage of their masters who grant them money to do their "research".  Oh wait we come to find out they did do just that!  Crap.  So much for the scientists supposedly independent from the big money and being honest instead of on the A list.


How is global warming a "dogma"?
Using the definition above, please explain.


It's a dogma when the cause of it is dumped on human activity by the scientists so that the EPA can agree and humans can then be taxed.  Which is what is happening and will continue to happen.  All contingent upon rising CO2 levels with no real proof that is the cause of the global warming.  But they need to blame humans and their activity, make it official and tax it.


Even if what you were saying was correct, it would still not be dogma.
Did you even look at the definition of dogma?

teknix said:
Materialism is scientism revisited. Sheldrake is right, these are common misconception of atheist. Why do you think these same ideas and concepts revolve around these views as ultimate fact? Many people like to take all the specific evidence we have for things as evidence of all there is.

I don't see why they deleted it, it is good to consider our own bias as well as others. If you only consider your own, you get a lopsided view.


Well a lot of people (including the author of the video) like to imply that science dictates that paranormal activity is not true - and they miss the point. All science dictates is that unless there is evidence for something and that evidence can be tested and proven as sound (until perhaps better evidence comes out if that will happen, depending on the situation), then there exists no evidence for it and so it's not an accepted as happening. There is no evidence for paranormal activity, just as there is no evidence for a god.


--------------------
:brainondrugs:

You are not special :haha:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Cyclohexylamine]
    #19629630 -

tymoteusz3 said:
LunarEclipse said:
tymoteusz3 said:
LunarEclipse said:
Yes, because everyone knows the climate scientists would never use the dogma of global warming to the advantage of their masters who grant them money to do their "research".  Oh wait we come to find out they did do just that!  Crap.  So much for the scientists supposedly independent from the big money and being honest instead of on the A list.


How is global warming a "dogma"?
Using the definition above, please explain.


It's a dogma when the cause of it is dumped on human activity by the scientists so that the EPA can agree and humans can then be taxed.  Which is what is happening and will continue to happen.  All contingent upon rising CO2 levels with no real proof that is the cause of the global warming.  But they need to blame humans and their activity, make it official and tax it.


Even if what you were saying was correct, it would still not be dogma.
Did you even look at the definition of dogma?




Yes, I did look at the above definition.  The example I gave fits within that.  And it's not IF true, these "climate scientists" got outed on the global warming dogma not too long ago.  Of course, that won't stop the EPA from being the political part of your definition to enforce the dogma of climate warming.  They have to call it climate change now because even the warming part is in question.  Still won't stop the taxman from taxing.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: circastes] * 1
    #19629645 -

circastes said:
Interesting TEDx talk for PS&P's benefit and discussion.

The 10 Dogmas Of Science

-That nature is mechanical.
-That matter is unconscious.
-The laws of nature are fixed.
-The totally amount of matter and energy are always the same.
-That nature is purposeless.
-Biological inheritance is material.
-That memories are stored as material traces.
-The mind is in the brain.
-Telepathy and other psychic phenomena are illusory.
-Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that really works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zamrs3nE9ys


I've studied science for years, got a couple degrees, performed research, attended conferences and talks... I have never ever heard any of this crap.  I think its just made up.  None of that is a dogma of science.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: DieCommie]
    #19629810 -

It's a common misconception that people who "believe in science" have. Did you hear him claim that at the beginning?

Of course you can make it seem ridiculous if you take it out of context.

So many defensive people, lol . . .

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: teknix] * 3
    #19630097 -

I read him claim that in the first post.  I dont watch videos posted here, its a waste of time.  I did click it just now and the first line he says is wrong, bullshit and ignorant of the philosophy of science.  Now I am reminded why I dont watch posted videos.  Im not going to waste any more time on it, that for sure.

"...the belief that science already understands the nature of reality."  Give me a break...  That statement makes no sense, is not correct and betrays ignorance of the philosophy of science.  That is not a belief that anybody I have ever meet has.  "Science" cannot "understand" anything, that is not how science works.  The "nature of reality" is irrelevant to science.  Science deals describing and predicting observations.  "Reality" is a construct that is not used, useful or needed in science.  "Reality" is the darling of the mystic and the religious.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: DieCommie] * 1
    #19630202 -

I don't know about that.

"Scientific realism

Scientific realism is, at the most general level, the view that the world described by science (perhaps ideal science) is the real world, as it is, independent of what we might take it to be. Within philosophy of science, it is often framed as an answer to the question "how is the success of science to be explained?" The debate over what the success of science involves centers primarily on the status of entities that are not directly observable discussed by scientific theories. Generally, those who are scientific realists state that one can make reliable claims about these entities (viz., that they have the same ontological status) as directly observable entities, as opposed to instrumentalism."

While it is philosophy which coined the term it does seem to be a prevailing view amongst the scientific community.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Kickle]
    #19630265 -

I started watching the clip and tuned it out after about a minute because I thought it was rife with misinformation. But he started talking about universal constants, e.g. the speed of light or Newtonian gravity. And he discussed the fact that they have not been constant over the life-span of physics.

Now, this again could be misinformation, I wouldn't really know. He does cite the time period he is deriving this from. He also cites how metrology works when defining gravity as a constant. I was hoping someone would weigh in here. I'd especially appreciate it if they would watch from ~9:50 to ~14:45 and then provide educated feedback.


--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Cyclohexylamine]
    #19630289 -

tymoteusz3 said:
Well a lot of people (including the author of the video) like to imply that science dictates that paranormal activity is not true - and they miss the point. All science dictates is that unless there is evidence for something and that evidence can be tested and proven as sound (until perhaps better evidence comes out if that will happen, depending on the situation), then there exists no evidence for it and so it's not an accepted as happening. There is no evidence for paranormal activity, just as there is no evidence for a god.



I actually found the author of the video to have more depth than that. His claim is that due to the dogmas of science, the scope of view and subsequently investigation is limited. That the absence of findings is a reflection of limitations in view as opposed to absence of phenomena. It seems reasonable to consider to me.

I thought his dogmas were by-and-large full of :holyshit: but there were some aspects that I can't say that about because I don't have enough information. The constants of physics is a good example. I don't understand how they are derived well enough. I don't understand why a mathematical equation becomes almost carved in stone. I don't know if there is any precedence for a mathematical equation that seemed to explain phenomena not holding up over time. I don't know if constants dictate the direction of investigation in physics. I don't know if constants are ever held under the microscope once established. Etc.


--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: circastes]
    #19630305 -

If one replaces "dogma of science" with "materialism" things begin to make more sense.

Materialism, n.  a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici

Edited by DividedQuantum (02/28/14 12:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Ten Dogmas of Science [Re: Kickle]
    #19630425 -

Science does not have dogmas. People have dogmas. Groups, corporations, and religions have dogmas. Science has a method.

Take for example The Shroomery. Did you know that the PF tek worked before you actually tried it? If you had seen this website you would know. You could see repeated attempts successfully achieved through written accounts and photographs. You could be certain that if you followed each step you would get the desired outcome. That is the scientific method. That is science.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ 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 Science Bashing Thread
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 5,197 51 12/29/05 12:04 AM
by dr0mni
* I want to debate a "creation scientist".
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )		 Phluck 17,216 232 12/01/04 04:26 PM
by Diploid
* Science the ultimate tool?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Icelander 6,870 94 08/05/05 12:13 PM
by EquilibriuM
* Pseudo-Science Annapurna1 1,801 14 11/18/03 12:30 PM
by trendal
* Mysticism - The Ultimate Science Source 1,624 18 04/09/04 11:44 PM
by Swami
* Science and the 5 senses faslimy 1,725 8 05/25/06 07:19 AM
by psyka
* The Limitations of Science
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Anonymous 7,539 85 01/22/04 12:17 AM
by trippy
* Dogma Sucks. Not to offend or annoy... Sclorch 1,797 8 07/21/02 05:46 AM
by World Spirit

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,231 topic views. 0 members, 24 guests and 25 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 0.028 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 18 queries.