|
elaspeinreason
psychonaut
Registered: 07/31/05
Posts: 1,029
Loc: fairfax virginia
Last seen: 11 years, 3 months
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: Diploid]
#5108783 - 12/26/05 08:31 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Diploid said: That is the net sum of science.
well said.
-------------------- Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one Diploid said: What's with proclaiming freedom by abridging freedom? That makes no sense.
|
dblaney
Human Being
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 7,894
Loc: Here & Now
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: Diploid]
#5108804 - 12/26/05 08:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I think you're looking at it too superficially. Science assumes that some observable, objective reality exists. Which is a matter of faith. That's where it comes in. Everything is always experienced subjectively, though there are many things that we experience in common.
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: dblaney]
#5108837 - 12/26/05 08:38 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
dblaney said: I think you're looking at it too superficially. Science assumes that some observable, objective reality exists. Which is a matter of faith. That's where it comes in. Everything is always experienced subjectively, though there are many things that we experience in common.
One step ahead of you:
Quote:
Sclorch said: Prove you're not a brian floating in a vat and I can prove that your own experience validates science. Solipsism is a bitch... but if I were all by myself, I think I'd start believing in God too. If I didn't, I'd vanish in a puff of logic faster than Descartes thinking not.
Faith in your own experience is the only practical faith there is.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite
Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: Diploid]
#5108883 - 12/26/05 08:45 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I don't see any faith there, only observation (which requires no faith) and experimental verification (which requires no faith).
There is faith involved in observation. There is an implied belief in the reliability of the senses.
This is no less an act of faith than assuming that logical axioms hold true.
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero
Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: shroomydan]
#5109980 - 12/27/05 01:18 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Solipsism is a bitch.
amen. its also a great conversation stopper... hah
-------------------- No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger
Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: shroomydan]
#5109985 - 12/27/05 01:25 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'd say, from my Absurdo-Nihilist view, scientists have faith that Science is currently our best method for understanding the universe. But, I don't think this is very much like "any other faith." The leap of faith taken to hold this view seems tiny. Science is a system which is extremely functional and most importantly, testable. So, while there is a possibility that science is a fraud, merely the invention of Satan, or a shitload of coincediences, this possibility is TOO DAMN SMALL to take seriously.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: What's the Scientific Proof for Science? [Re: MushmanTheManic]
#5110294 - 12/27/05 06:03 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
If there was any sort of proof for science itself, I would wager that it would be that of technology, any application of science. The testing of the hypothesis will determine if the hypothesis is a valid observation. That which pertains to science can be proven through science.
As far as absolute validity of science itself goes, it isn't an apt question. Its like asking if the push up is absolutely valid.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
|