Believe in science & ethics

last SG · 2007-08-17T14:02:49+00:00

The scope of science is very wide.It includes social sciences such as sociology,psychology and politics.

Ibram Gaunt SG

Yes, please elaborate. What is this wondrous "6th sense" that you speak so exultantly of?

You said in your previous posting that it is "awareness".....well, what kind of "awareness" are we talking about. Please elaborate, one liners do not contribute to this thread.

I did do a web search and all I got are just sites on Mr Shyamalan's ghost movie and some websites that promote pseudoscientific psychic beliefs....and if this is the "6th sense" that you talk about, then it is patently much much more unreliable (and indeed is plain supersitious folly) than the scientific method in studying natural phenomena.

soul_rage SG

Ah, the pot calling the kettle black then. Please read your previous postings. You started by calling me a great disbeliever and a contranian, when all I call upon is for the understanding that Science cannot be 100% believable. Smile So I wonder who is misrepresenting who? Smile

Bear in mind then, that when you accuse someone else, you are most often found performing the same act too.

No, I din say Science was not great.
And I said before that I respect and agree that Science is the best tool to explain many things around us.

So long as you agree with me that Science is not 100% believable (which you have to, coz you are again implicitly agreeing to this when you say Science is self-correcting. If it is not 100% trustworthy, then there is room for self-correction), we can stop the argument Smile

Its not that you have no idea what the 6th sense is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.

Ibram Gaunt SG

Yup, I totally agree with you.

And as I said before, the scientific methodology is not 100% foolproof (becos it is a tool of "imperfect humans"), but it is still much better (and more trustworthy) than other methods of studying the world around us.

People like soul_rage love to slam science, but can they come up with a better alternative methodology in studying the natural world? Nope, science may not be 100% foolproof but it is definitely more reliable than other mental tools mankind can employ in understanding our universe.

Ibram Gaunt SG

soul_rage SG

here we go again... sigh... I did not slam science. I merely am just giving examples on how Science is not 100% trustworthy.

Now you are agreeing to my point, that it is not 100% foolproof.

That's all I am saying.

Perhaps you should see how you go about slamming others, before accusing others of slamming science. Smile

soul_rage SG

have you ever done meditation?
If you do, then you may have some idea of what I am talking about.
If not, then there's nothing much else we can talk further, coz Fingolfin is right that I cannot prove it using Science Smile

soul_rage SG

My apologies to call you a layman then, but yes you are right that 6th sense is not quantifiable. That's something that Science cannot explain now.

soul_rage SG

He who calls others stupid usually becomes the butt of all jokes as well Smile

There's no stupid people in this world actually. Heck, even Gazelle is not stupid, just a bit myopic that's all

Fingolfin_Noldor SG

No offense taken. Razz

AndrewPKYap SG

Did you think I was referring to you? Mr. Green

Ibram Gaunt SG

Thank you for validating my position. It is indeed good to hear you admit that science is "great".

I ask you to explain/verify it. You didn't. Or perhaps refuse to or did not know what it is before mentioning it.

It is circular reasoning to claim that another refuse understanding of something that does not exist in the first place (except in the imagination)?

Meditation is simply a form of exercise that relaxes the mind (in some cases anyway....). It is not proven to have transcedental properties that can bring about greater awareness of explanation to physical phenomena.

By the same argument that you employ, I can also say:
Its not that you have no idea what Santa Claus is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.

Its not that you have no idea what juju rays from space is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.

Its not that you have no idea what universal psycho-energy, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.

See how ridiculous above (italicised) lines of argument are......

AndrewPKYap SG

Humans are like that, they want absolute certainty where there is none. They then go on to make the stupid mistake of assuming that since there are no absolute certainties, then it is free for all and people should be allowed to create their own unfounded / delusional rubbish.

soul_rage SG

whether you refer to me or not is not important

Its how you view others. Calling others stupid is never a good thing to begin with.

Its more about your moral behavior that I am looking at.

soul_rage SG

I can't, coz you believe in Science (and I would say without Science to validate it, you will never believe what I say) Smile

As I mentioned, you insist on proof on seeing, hearing, touching, smelling it, which is something that Science is based on, seeing, hearing, touching, smelling.

If you have tried meditation, then maybe we can discuss, but if you haven't, then there's no point in going on this, because
(1) you are not interested to know my opinion
(2) your true motive is just to demean or insult my opinion.
(3) without meditation, you won't know what I am talking about.

AndrewPKYap SG

and "who" are these others? Please name me a name, you? Mr. Green

You are symptomatic of the problem with unscientific people... you run with the assumptions in your head. You imagine and make wild inaccurate guesses and then criticize other people base on your wild imaginings. Rolling Eyes

soul_rage SG

And thanks for validating MY position, that Science is not 100% foolproof.

You are behaving like many researchers, selective information or data. You refuse to admit data that is against what you are looking for (your objective).

You already have the end in mind when you started your postings, which is the very same behavior many researchers put to practice, when they conduct an experiment or research, due to commercial/practical/etc reasons.

soul_rage SG

You can look at your other threads in Politics. Its easy for me to find threads in which you call others stupid Smile

Again, selective data to accept into this thread? Smile

I make wild inaccurate imaginations on you calling others stupid? Interesting. Many of us do not know what we truly did until someone points it out to us. Go to your threads in Politics, and you can see many real examples of what you posted

AndrewPKYap SG

Oh you mean that you are trying to talk outside of the context of this thread? Rolling Eyes If I call others stupid, I am alway careful to state why, that is, the context in which he is being stupid. For all I know, he could be brilliant in another context, but within the context that I called him stupid, he is!

Like here, now, don't you think that you are simply "stupid" for assuming that the post I made referred to you? Not that you are a stupid person in all contexts and all situations, but you certainly are stupid to assume that it refers to you and get all worked up about it. Mr. Green

soul_rage SG

Like I said to you, whether you make this comment on anyone is secondary.
Even if you made this comment at Ibram Gaunt or any others, I would make the exact reply back to you.

Now you are justifying your actions of calling others stupid? Smile Very interesting, your assumptions (not to mention your moral behavior) were all messed up at the beginning Smile

AndrewPKYap SG

so according to you people are brilliant all the time and nobody makes any stupid mistakes and stupid errors in their lives and nobody should point out to people when they make stupid mistakes? Brilliant!

So you happy now since I called you Brilliant! ? Mr. Green

« Previous Page Next Page »