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!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Theories
    #4187347 -

Webster:

theory - A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

can be used to make predictions

can be used

People here constantly misuse the word theory for any wacky explanation. The "theory" that we are spirit-fill beings; is NOT predictive nor testable; hence NOT a theory; just an imaginary story.

The next step is usually to compare a real theory such as Evolution, with a non-theory such as Creationism (bu to call it a theory so as to obsfucate) as if they were on equal footing.

There are thousands of non-theories posted here about mushrooms, ancient civilizations, life-after-death which is fine, but do NOT call baseless imaginings, theory.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187356 -

Why is creationism less of a theory than evolution?
Both are hard to prove, and can only be proven by negating the other one, and both are extreamly unlikely.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #4187371 -

Simply because evolution can be
Quote:
repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.


while creationism cannot. There is a difference between a conception that relies on assumptions with relatively high probability (evolution) and faith (creationism).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4187378 -

Swamster, could there be a theory stating that one day you will not exist.
Can we call that an absolute theory? Or just easier an Absolute.

Peace,
Droz


--------------------
Evolution of Time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Droz]
    #4187388 -

It is impossible to deductively prove that Swami will one day not exist, simply because premises to support such an analogical argument do not exist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4187389 -

High probability? Haven't you heard of that analogy that the chance that a DNA molecule could be made by a random process is as same as the chance that a tornado can make a fully functional 747 out of random parts on a junkjard?
Is that a high probability?


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #4187393 -

Quote:
relatively high probability


Compared to other theories of existence, evolution makes the least assumptions.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4187405 -

Yes, but just because we have only a few theories and one of them is mor probable than others, doesn't mean that it is then of high probability. It only means that it is least ridiculous.

I think we should slightly step back from all of the theories in existence and rethink them a bit. I don't buy either of them


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187409 -

The use is relative. The goal for the use is also relative. I have had some private convos filled with what most others would call gibberish and wacko theories, but if who I am discussing the theory with has the same goal and knows how to use it then who is to say what is a theory and what isn't.

If I don't care to build a baseball field, all theories on the best design are useless to me and will sound wacko because I have no goals for fitting baseball fields into my reality.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #4187413 -

OldWoodSpecter said:
Yes, but just because we have only a few theories and one of them is mor probable than others, doesn't mean that it is then of high probability. It only means that it is least ridiculous.



I meant high as in ordinal rank, the highest.

Quote:
I think we should slightly step back from all of the theories in existence and rethink them a bit.


Agreed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: OldWoodSpecter]
    #4187422 -

Nice parroting job OWS. :rolleyes:

This quote was made out of ignorance of the processes of self organization principles of chemistry and the laws of probability (among other things).

The odds of something happening after-the-fact are ALWAYS 100% or 1 out of 1.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4187424 -

OldWoodSpecter - Well the, do you believe there is intelligence behind our creation? Like some sort of strange entity that is on a different level then we are, sort of like existing in a different dimension or something?

It's very hard to believe in intelligent design, are they even simple random mutations? Or are they so complex that we don't have the capability to grasp it?

Peace,
Droz


--------------------
Evolution of Time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187426 -

The same reason a train crossing is called a crossing although it's really an intersection.


--------------------
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

- Aristotle

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4187437 -

then who is to say what is a theory and what isn't.

I only repeated the salient characteristic FOUR TIMES so as to avoid this sort of confusion.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Droz]
    #4187439 -

Droz said:
OldWoodSpecter - Well the, do you believe there is intelligence behind our creation? Like some sort of strange entity that is on a different level then we are, sort of like existing in a different dimension or something?

It's very hard to believe in intelligent design, are they even simple random mutations? Or are they so complex that we don't have the capability to grasp it?

Peace,
Droz


If there is an intelligence behind the creation of humans and life on earth in general, then I think it is not some supernatural being from another dimension, but a very natural "real" entity, like we are only with better tools.


--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187527 -

Personally, I prefer to use the term "best-guess" when discussing ideas which I cannot possibly prove or disprove.

A college chemistry teacher once explained to our class that he had conducted an experiment to prove the existence of God, and therefore the "truth" of Creationism.

He described his hypothesis: that God exists, and that He created the Earth and its creatures. He tested this hypothesis by praying. He believed that his hypothesis had been proven correct, thus advancing his hypothesis into the category of "theory."

I sat staring in utter disbelief at his display of unscientific, circular reasoning. That was my last science class at that college!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Veritas]
    #4187554 -

No one can make you feel inferior without your permission.

Damn! Now that my shtick is blown and people realize that I have no power over them, I might as well pack my bags.

Thanks a lot!  :mad:


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Veritas]
    #4187579 -

You set an example for his having a goal. He used his theory to obtain his goal.

It reads wacko from here because I don't share in his goal and have no use for his theory but.........to each his own.

Just because its proof to him doesn't mean it is to others. I bet for others who share in his goal his theory is useful.

Weird how that works. :crazy2:

What if someone is dumping their theory on you for getting to mars and all you care about is feeding the starving children in Somalia. You are going to look at the dude like he is nuts and tell him he is a whack job for wanting to get there with all the starving children here to tend to and his theory is useless to you.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187606 -

Quote:
Hacking Young Minds: 1999-2005


:wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187623 -

the?o?ry ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-r, th?r)
n. pl. the?o?ries

1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.

3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.

4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.

5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.

6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theory


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187640 -

theory - A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Note that it says "especially one that has..." which indicates that testability/predictiveness is not so much a requirement as it is the "norm".

That being said, theories which hold no predictive power are useless, and theories which are untestable are little more than thought-experiments.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Edited by trendal (05/17/05 04:27 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Frog]
    #4187647 -

Don't stop there Frogzilla. Keep going.

Webster

conjecture: Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence.

inference: The act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187660 -

Okay, hang on a sec.


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187663 -

If someone plants a tree in the remote woods, then comes back with a friend 1 year later and the tree is not there, does it become a "Theory", or a "Fact", a "Belief", or "Nothing"....?    One person could swear that it was there because they planted it, but to anyone else, it never did....


:sun:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #4187673 -

Read Descartes' meditations. The friend could be dreaming. He could of been deceived. He could of been lying.

The only thing we can deductively prove is that we are conscious.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187678 -

No, wait, no need to hang on. I'm justs saying that it is not wrong to call something a theory that an assumption or conjecture can still be called a theory, even when based on little or no evidence. It's one of the definitions of "theory."


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4187682 -

So why are you confused about the relativity of usefulness?


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4187707 -

spud said:
Read Descartes' meditations. The friend could be dreaming. He could of been deceived. He could of been lying.
.
The only thing we can deductively prove is that we are conscious.


.
What if this guy had a photographs of him planting the tree step by step, and decided to not show the friend....    There would be un-used proof, but where does that leave the tree in relation to the friend....?    If he believed the friend without the proof, would it be based on "Theory", "Faith", "Belief", or "Nothing"....?

:sun:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #4187724 -

The friend could be dreaming. The photograph and the whole memory of planting the tree or his friend telling him that he planted the tree could be part of his dream.

Or, perhaps God was deceiving us. After all, we are deceived at times, right? God is an all-powerful, all-knowing, and perfectly good being. Therefor, the fact that we are deceived at times means God has no problem with deceiving us. In effect, we could be deceived constantly, since God has no objection.

There are several other scenarios that make it impossible to deductively prove your point.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4187743 -

spud said:
There are several other scenarios that make it impossible to deductively prove your point.


Exactly my point....!    :sun:

All theories, facts, beliefs, faiths are all subject to personal perception/perspectives to their own consciousness/awareness.... 

I personally live in a life of ~wonder~................    :sun:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #4187808 -

eMotionALLmotion said:
All theories, facts, beliefs, faiths are all subject to personal perception/perspectives to their own consciousness/awareness.... 

I personally live in a life of ~wonder~................    :sun:


:thumbup:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Frog]
    #4187830 -

:lol: I was wondering why swami called you frogzilla and I just noticed you switched back to your old avatar. :lol:

Uhhhh it's cute!


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4187865 -

Thanks for clearing it up for me as well, Jiggy.  :heart:  :grin:


--------------------
The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire.  -Teilard

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4188044 -

What is this topic supposed to generate? Another idea? some sort of philosophical/religous meaning? You should just make one post, that compiles all your definitions and observation of peoples errors in this forum. It might better serve you and everyone else, cause it might make your idea more clear and to the point.

I dont know, i was kind of misled when i saw it as a topic, then i actually read what it was about. Your responders are the only ones who began to make a discussion/question out of it :wink:.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #4188922 -

eMotionALLmotion said:
All theories, facts, beliefs, faiths are all subject to personal perception/perspectives to their own consciousness/awareness....



:thumbup:


I have several "working theories" about how/why my world works. If you refuse to believe my theory then it wont work for you.

There are MANY theories out there. Some work some of the time, others work most of the time. Very few work EVERYTIME.


--------------------
Live for the moment you are in now
Don't be bogged down by your past
Don't be afraid of what lies in your future

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4189336 -

What is this topic supposed to generate?

That is a silly question. EVERY single thread veers off into tangential space in short order. No thread is supposed to take us anywhere. There is no track to follow; no agenda. An idea is tossed out and people choose to discuss or not. It goes where the group takes it. Very simple.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Frog]
    #4189338 -

Jiggerama-mama is just jealous because I stopped calling her cutesy names.  :cool: :heart:


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: spud]
    #4189641 -

one minor note to toss into the mix..  it is true that 'theories' are the most popular ideas of the time but it should be emphasized that they remain only 'theories' because while they have "been repeatedly tested" or are "widely accepted", no scientist has yet been able to prove them conclusively.  No matter how you turn the phrase, these are ideas about how the universe works which work pretty consistantly but which we can not prove conclusively.  All theories (even our beloved Darwin's) that we acknowledge now originally began as unpopular theories held by a small group of people who repeatedly have success with their tests and were lucky enough to become popular.

Creationism for example is a theory (not one I subscribe to in the conventional sense but that's beside the point  :wink:) because various aspects of religion Had been repeatedly tested during the period it was popular.  (remember that the church were the scientists and scholars of their age, not just cloistered monks carving icons)  Even today religion is still being tested and no one besides Douglas Adams  :tongue2: has yet successfully disproved (to my knowledge) the research or findings of those original monks.  I keep saying 'testing religion' rather then 'testing Creationism' because Creationism can not be tested anymore then 'Evolution' can, we have to look at related events.  'Evolution' is believed to be true because other aspects appear to match up, such as dino bones, and evolution of current species, but in all this time we still have not found a direct link between humans and monkeys, only close similarities.  When God comes down to tell us 'here's what I did', Darwin rises up and shows us the complete evoutionary chain for humanity, or aliens show us pictures of the cells they put down which became us, then these theories will go away but until then they are all valid, regardless of whether or not modern scientists like them.

Long story short, as far as I am concerned a theory is just as you described: "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena" (which does not negate that individuals can devise their own theories), and a Popular theory is "one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena" (which is not to negate that unpopular theories can still exist until they are successfully disproven, if they have any chance of being true).  I hope people keep coming up with and fighting for unpopular theories because it costs me nothing for them to spend their time this way, and if one out of a thousand turns out to be true.. go human race!  :grin:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Theories [Re: Swami]
    #4189980 -

Swami said:
Jiggerama-mama is just jealous because I stopped calling her cutesy names.  :cool: :heart:


:rotfl:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

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

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

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

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Prediction Theory Zero7a1 1,292 13 05/08/03 10:02 PM
by Zero7a1
* Kaballah and String Theory undecided 1,390 16 01/16/03 10:41 AM
by SnuffelzFurever
* Endless Big Bang Theory
( 1 2 3 all )		 The_Clash_UK 4,941 43 07/16/02 02:14 PM
by francisco
* God Exists
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Zahid 12,520 113 03/18/03 03:57 PM
by falcon
* An example of using the principles of logic.
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 3,735 29 07/24/03 12:32 AM
by Sclorch
* reality theory
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 1stimer 8,369 92 10/05/02 09:59 PM
by Calen
* God Cannot Exist
( 1 2 all )		 jim_dewit 5,606 39 08/22/02 06:29 PM
by Xlea321
* it seems therefore, that God does not exist. whiterastahippie 1,888 12 11/11/11 02:01 AM
by thefloodbehind

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,313 topic views. 2 members, 177 guests and 50 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 0.033 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.