Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Micro102]

It's pretty solid, if you don't believe there is a god, your an atheist.

[Haspen]

But if I know that every religion is made up by Humans who need to believe in something, but there might be a divine being somewhere (he's not communicating with us, clever guy!)...

...Uh.

[chaoticag]

Neruz is probably going to drop in his view that it means rejecting theology and the supernatural. Which is having a naturalistic world view (there is only the natural, not the supernatural). Nothing to do with Atheism, although most atheists pursue that path.

[MrWiggles]

Well thats seems silly. You can reject god but believe in ghosts or other woo. They're independent claims.

[Huesoo]

Has it ever come to mind that science is neither, its just science.

Science is Science. How scientific.

Philosophy is Philosophy. How philosophic.

[chaoticag]

Pretty much. It's a no true scottsman arguement with that. Yay for logical fallacies.

Has it ever come to mind that science is neither, its just science.

Science is Science. How scientific.

Philosophy is Philosophy. How philosophic.

(Oh hey, I can do this too! Ummm... uh...)
Chairs are chairs, how chairific?

On a more serious note, I'm not sure why Siquo is equating Philosophy and science together here. Once again, no true scottsman. You can't add your personal definition to the end of things.

[Siquo]

The scotsman has really nothing to do with it...

Science was conceived by philosophy, therefore I treat it as such. The scientific method is merely a body of techniques, as mathematics is. I know people will disagree, because it's so versatile in its non-definition. It can be:
- a paradigm
- a way of life
- a utility
- an enemy
- a religion
- a philosophy
- the ultimate truth
- the ultimate lie
- just another way of looking at it
- Gods sense of humour
- Gods way of getting stuff done

There's no way all those views are ever able to agree with eachother on the meaning of life science.

[fenrif]

The scotsman has really nothing to do with it...

Science was conceived by philosophy, therefore I treat it as such. The scientific method is merely a body of techniques, as mathematics is. I know people will disagree, because it's so versatile in its non-definition. It can be:
- a paradigm
- a way of life
- a utility
- an enemy
- a religion
- a philosophy
- the ultimate truth
- the ultimate lie
- just another way of looking at it
- Gods sense of humour
- Gods way of getting stuff done

There's no way all those views are ever able to agree with eachother on the meaning of life science.

You can say that about anythin in existance ever, it can be anything. A chair can be a chair, firewood, a bed, god's plan B, the answer to all questions, the ultimate insignificance, 1001 arabian nights, etc.

Whether science was conceived by philosophy or not (any sort of evidence towards that would be interesting though if you could link to some articles or something) you cant treat it like philosophy, because its a completely different thing. Just because something grows from something else doesn't mean they are the same thing, and should be handled the same way.

Atomic power and atomic bombs both came from the same line of research in the beginning, yet one can be used to provide bucket loads of cheap power, and the other is a force of unimaginable destruction. You dont treat them the same way.

You're right about the scientific method being akin to math though. They're both similiar in many respects. I just dont think that having no definition is one of them.

[Siquo]

...

Ok I'll hide my astoundedness, and provide you with some information. Or here, if you feel like reading a lot.

[chaoticag]

There still is a diffrence there. It may come from philosophy, but that doesn't make it philosophy. It runs on philosophy, but that doesn't make it any more philosophy than Dwarf Fortress.

Your car comes from a factory, but that does not make it a factory, and it runs of fuel, but that doesn't make it fuel.

[MrWiggles]

I come from my parents, doesn that make me my parents?

[Siquo]

Useless analogies aside, what is it then, according to you?

[chaoticag]

Simple, an explanation of the natural world derived from information obtained from the natural world.

Versus the definition of Philosophy here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.

Science doesn't explore those fundamental problems, it explicitly avoids them.

[TheDarkJay]

Explicitly avoids? When?

It provides explanations:
Knowledge: Neurology, Psychology.
Values: Neurology, Psychology, Sociology.
Reason: Neurology, Psychology, Sociology.
Mind: I presume this means the abstract concept of the mind: Psychology.
Language; Neurology, Psychology, Sociology.

We simply accept present technology and level of understanding is rather low, and and some things are difficult to study ethically. One day we may have more in depth explanations.

Still, I do find Philosophy interesting. Inherently pointless, but interesting.

[Bauglir]

Science is gathering data and using logic to interpret that data to reach a generalized statement that can be applied to reality as a whole. Philosophy is that, but you can start by supposing the data instead of gathering it to ensure it fits reality. Reality, in this case, being the universe our senses, er, sense.