|
solarshroomster
Wonderer



Registered: 11/01/13
Posts: 506
Last seen: 3 days, 22 hours
|
Re: About THAT Big Bang [Re: Gorguss] 1
#28235695 - 03/18/23 08:17 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Science has provided a lot of information, but it would be almost embarrassing to point out how it hasn't even touched the surface of answering the big questions.
I've found it to be extraordinarily distracting at times, and marveling too much at it, as Einstein pointed out, makes us forget how little we do know. I can't count the number of times that scientism has led people to burying their heads and, for instance, explaining how love just exists because of serotonin receptors (as if, their reductionism provided anything more than a correlation and never explained why the correlation had to be that way and not some other way, why there even needed to be a correlation, or why there is even something called the sensation itself that exists as it does).
The problem is that in order to answer the big question, physics needs to answer itself. And when it does so, it will be relying, not on physics, or the scientific method, but the undecidability of the teacher from which it was born: Philosophy.
Appropriately, when it comes to explaining "why do the laws of physics exist", scientists bunt outright. The multiverse doesn't provide our answer, since we still have to ask "why does the logic necessarily need to exist" to generate all possible worlds.
And then there's the issue of the problem of induction, which scientistic thinkers feel they can evade by saying how everything "must be decided by deduction", or "never ask 'why', ask 'how'". It's a confusion of epistemological limitations of the scientific method with reality itself. Just because we see a cycle of patterns, doesn't mean that pattern has always been that way or will always be that way. We are forever stuck with not knowing for sure. Science also can't deal with things that are "too subjective", or don't repeat frequently, like UFOs.
Don't get me wrong, I think science tears away at questions that bewildered me how it possibly solved, but it hasn't made a dent in answering any of the big questions. Einstein rightly once quipped:
Quote:
[T]he fanatical atheists...are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against the traditional 'opium of the people'—cannot hear the music of the spheres."
Or, as Heisenberg put it:
Quote:
"We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning."
You will always be inside your questioning, and the scientific method is just that. Even if we were to upload ourselves into a computer, we will still be left wondering who is generating any of the simulation. I think we're fundamentally left with uncertainty.
And that's not even getting into the humbling practical issue of how people repeatedly think "they have it all figured out", only to then have to revise their entire thesis.
Edited by solarshroomster (03/18/23 08:30 PM)
|
Gorguss
Chaotic sums


Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 634
Last seen: 21 minutes, 16 seconds
|
|
Quote:
connectedcosmos said: I agree mankind is better off with science than without it , science is the study of objects though, what is awareness? Not an object therefore cannot be studied objectively
Are you a philosophical materialist perchance?
Never heard of this until now, looked it up. I suppose from my understanding of a few lines of definition, to some extent, yes i am.
I believe you could recreate realities with future technology. I firmly believe in matrix level simulation possibility. We know so little about the brain, it'll be exciting to see how wrong or right I am, and what quality of life improvements may be discovered.
-------------------- ------------ ------------
|
Gorguss
Chaotic sums


Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 634
Last seen: 21 minutes, 16 seconds
|
Re: About THAT Big Bang [Re: Gorguss]
#28235870 - 03/18/23 11:12 PM (10 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Maybe not because I see somewhere it says they only believe matter is a form of substance, but energy is too, as they are two sides to the same coin.
-------------------- ------------ ------------
|
|