| Author
|
A thread that Hos nothing to do with music but all at the same time
|
unproject
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
54
Posted : Jan 10, 2007 14:54
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-10 09:12, bukboy wrote:
Simple question:
How can people know something that science cant?
And I mean really "know" not suspect or think.
|
|
Reminding me some religion fanatics quotes, your post begs for many questions but most obviously:
"How can science know something that men can't? Isn't science about humans taking the actions of thinking or suspecting to the next step?"
It seems to me like some people (which may include yourself, based on my assumptions from some of your posts) perceive science as a set of rules written in stone. A compass always showing the one and only truth, the right, the good, whatever. And any possible idea variations are, to repeat the popular saying, "hot air". While I agree there's alot of hot air in the world, I'll have to disagree with this kind of approach. Being able to question every paradigm is the nature of science. Science advances cumulatively, and it's a doctrine involving many different points of view.
This can easily be seen in social sciences. Political science, sociology, psychology... They aren't dependant on ampiric data and they do not try to give you the one and only truth. They have different perspectives, different social analysis methods on the same subject, thus there are many different answers to the same question. As an example, the reasons behind the economic crisis that happened in the Eastern Asia in 1990's were explained quite differently by classic/neo-classic economists (government interventions) and neo-institutionalists (international finance companies)
But some people (may include you again, another assumption  ) may not even consider social sciences as a real form of science.
So lets talk about physics. In Atomic Theory, the partical structure was first thought to be similar to billiard balls. But then neutrons, protons and electrons were put forth and it started to be imagined as a raisin cake. Later it was discovered that electrons followed a circular path, and the atom theory was revised again. As you can see each scientific knowledge is a result of new observation methods, new tools and new perspectives. And it is why sometimes the paradigm does change. Like, from Newton Physics to Quantum Physics. The analysis tools develop, some parameters formerly ignored get involved, and science changes and improves.
This is even possible in some of the normative sciences as well. Euclides geometry is a consistent system in its own context. As long as there are 2 dimensions... But change the dimensions, bend the space, and you can see the interior angles of a triangle summing more or less than 180. Does it mean Euclides geometry is wrong? No. Does it mean it's the only possible truth? No again. It means that science isn't a dogma but an evolving process of understanding.
Hmm, so what? What i've been trying to tell is... I haven't obviously written these to prove the other's theories in this thread to be right or wrong, but to comment the modern world's approach to science. There are alot of people in this world that perceive science as a religion, replacing their gods with "scientific evidences", and refusing everything else. In this sense, it can be said that Materialism has somehow become a new religion. I dont really give a fuck about what people decide to worship but science isn't meant to be taken like that. It isn't dogmatic, it's a culture of methods continually trying to explain realities. It creates its own speech, rules and results. It sometimes contradicts with itself, discusses itself, and in the meanwhile, dialectically evolves. That's why expecting the truth from science is wrong. Sciences do not produce truths or facts, they produce "meanings".
My 2 cents |
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 10, 2007 18:07
|
Dont disagree with anything u said. Being an agnostic fence sitter myself All i want to see is good argument to change my mind.
I dont know Y u have this dogmatic view of what Ive said thus far.
Still didnt answer my question tho. |
|
|
|
in-human
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
28
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 04:39
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-10 09:12, bukboy wrote:
Simple question:
How can people know something that science cant?
And I mean really "know" not suspect or think.
|
|
Does anyone truly "know" ...... anything?
As we have seen scientific theories are being disproved everyday.
I don't think we can take anything for concrete these days.
|
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 07:17
|
Almost all knowledge to some degree is either synthetic or relative. And no not all knowledge is necessarily unknown. U KNOW that u exist precisely coz u feel and experience. Feeling without existing is a contradiction.
That said some people reject formal logic simply becoz they think logic is a human invention that although mimics the physical laws of the universe, does not guarantee that it is identical. Fair point. But It is my view that whenever I accept a theory for arguments sake and criticise it from within, despite any objective observations not really being deductive, a new world of complexity opens up before me once I accept the axiom that is being tested, to provide many useful highly surprising insights which I could not imagine. That is a strong form of evidence.
Because something that u couldnt imagine cant have been manufactured in your own brain.
BUT some types of evidence are inherently flawed. If there is nothing to be learnt from someones propounded theory then odds are its not real and is very imagined. This is grounds for dismissal actually.
So no I am not dogmatic, but I am pragmatic.
Plenty of fakery and sensationalism out there for many reasons. Politics, fame, wealth whatever. But u can discriminate a faker.
Anyway my view is anything is up for grabs providing your theory (truly) makes me understand better how to control my environment.
And this is also scientific methodology. Unimagined insights is a large part of how successful a theory is. Scientific method takes it in2 account as one of its tools. U can b very scientific about observations of your theory, while looking for surprises, but u yourself can tell if anyone is gonna listen to you so dont propound useless boring stuff like the telepathy "scientist".
So my only way of justifying myself out of an epistemological hellhole, uses the same mechanism that science does, which makes me ask Y people think they can know something which science cannot. |
|
|
|
Raoul V
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
26
Posts :
583
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 09:14
|
Mods? Maybe you could start a section called, rants... where frustrated, single people, with lots of cats, can come slag each others beliefs off...
eitherway, could you keep it out the , music and production section, maybe move it to the india section.. lol
|
|
|
|
.Telektonon.
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
17
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 13:44
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-08 16:01, bukboy wrote:
Damn. How Do u Do it? (understandings from the 4D thing)
|
|
bukboy..... I have just returned from a very special journey that I made into the 4th dimension. My intension with this intergalactic excursion was to put forth to the 'Gods' an important question.
Even though it was cyclically wrong of me to enter the Bardo, and did take a lot of energy to do so at this time. I made sure I was clear on my intent and hoped that my ask was fulfilled being that the question I took was one of your behalf.
Knowing that you were interested in learning the language I did my best. I inquired into getting you a premeture 4th dimensional safari that would instruct you on your troubling predicaments and also to receive a discourse in the mother tongue.
The answer that I was bestowed with, came about from much hierarchical discussion and an on going deliberation. I was finally rebutted with the conclusion as to it not being possible at this time, to the fact that the transpiring probability of your evolution is proving to be one of a lengthy prolonging process. My appeals were ignored, and I was informed that at the least it would be more than likely to be achievable in your next incarnation and not of this lifetime. My report to you is that be it now or then, things are favourable and to keep up your preparations.
|
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 13:53
|
Dude thank u kindly. But I really think ur becoming schizophrenic.
I just had a friend who went bonkers on me, He only went on 1 acid trip like 6 years ago. Progressively every year he would lose a little contact with what was real. Ended up accusing me of ridiculous paranoid crap and subliminal messages in music, not to mention shouting out intimate confidences in public. Its a horrible experience to think Ive lost a friend of 11 years to insanity.
So no. Ul have a hard time convincing me that ur trip was anything real. |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 16:31
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-11 09:14, Raoul V wrote:
Mods? Maybe you could start a section called, rants... where frustrated, single people, with lots of cats, can come slag each others beliefs off...
eitherway, could you keep it out the , music and production section, maybe move it to the india section.. lol
|
|
I have a simple solution for you. Just ignore the topics you don't like. Same way as I ignore topics like "the best looking synth" that has even less to do with music than this one does.
 "It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Jan 11, 2007 20:12
|
I think this topic belongs here!
what does oxygen do to our minds, maybe it creates illusions? we will never know. casue without it we would be dead?
thats a question for the scientists 
|
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 03:12
|
now this is really something that can be proven wrong, im sure..
"Oxygen, as a supposed mild euphoric, has a history of recreational use (see oxygen bar). However, the reality of a pharmacological effect is doubtful being a metabolic boost the most plausible explanation. Controlled tests of high oxygen mixtures in diving (see nitrox) and other activities, even at higher than normal pressures, show no particular effects on humans other than promotion of an increased tolerance to aerobic exercise."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen
but this is just words from scientists, can we trust them?
still i think we have a hard time proving what is illusion and what is not, just look at spirit mediums, who can prove them wrong or right?
some might call them insane, but then the question about insanity arise. So many details comes to play when you are searching for the truth, often people get hooked by one detail and make their beliefs from that detail, just cause they want to believe in something so much. its dangerous to believe 
http://psychrights.org/Articles/Rosenham.htm
|
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 11:55
|
Ive learnt something from this forum - summed up as an argument.
Im not gonna die. I have never died before, and theres no proof that I even can die. So Im not gonna die.
Yippee. after ten thousand years Il be 10030. cant wait.
Im sure this statement or any of the 4D stuff would fly as completely normal in a hippy commune. But then again who cares. Hippy's dont do anything important or useful in the world, apart from shout peace, very unimpressive, any1 can do that.
And yes they would b considered quite insane by any1 in a position of serious resposibility.
By the way. I looked up some stuff about Albert Einstein. He was a HARDCORE Aetheist. He hated it when the religious community misrepresented his words in any personal god context. He was religious only in the sense that he felt a passion for the unfolding of the intricacies of the universe in a LOGICAL way.
When he responded to how his words were misrepresented by the various religious factions including christians and jews, he was sent all kinds of "Ur a scientist and dont know shit about GOD" from many religious leaders. So no I dont think he would approve of any of the ways in which his quotes are being used here. |
|
|
|
the daleks
The Daleks
Started Topics :
34
Posts :
584
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 14:05
|
ok, i just can't resist...
everyone is pretty much right, and i'm going to get to that in a second, but its a shame that the discussion devolved to mud-slinging and name calling
bukboy, you just proved to me how much you have your head up your ass at an early stage with you 'eastern philosophy is bunk' comment
great example of cultural imperialism there. you should put some more understanding into something before discrediting it.
for one, even with all of our great technology and shite, who says were better off than we were some thousands of years ago? some will argue that we are not, looking at the state of the planet as a whole, weapons that can wipe out everything, out of control pollution, environmental disasters daily news, and the world lit to pop any second. not grim, i am a realist, too. for those that call for a 'return to the source', 'primitive societies' are generally regarded as being more in tune with nature than our great western society with 4 computers and 2 dvd players in every home, but people still unhappy and wanting more.
yes there may be great advancements in medicine, and i for one am pretty stoked that i was able to get my eyes lasered to perfect vision, but there are also problems as well. one must see the whole picture, you would agree, right?
so next, yes, i believe that we are all interconnected, and there is alot about the universe that we and our sciences don't understand or can't comprehend, and things that we probably never will or should
Hawking's in A Brief History of Time - the chapter of quantum physics concedes that there are some things that are simply unexplainable, and even contradict eachother, which is what he describes as 'proof of God'. I can look for quotes if you want...
anyway, i dont want to get into theology. but what this all comes down to is belief
christians believe in God, Judaism in Yahweh, Islam in Allah, agnostics believe there is no God, atheists believe in the grea nothing, and some people believe in the ever-seeing clarity of science.
the operant word is belief, and the underlying concept being faith.
i personally dislike the hard cold view of rational science per say, and prefer to spice it up with a little mysticism, while at the same time trying to keep a balanced and realistice perspective, to deal with the boring and necessary parts of life. you can call me a hippy or whatever, but is not everyone entitled to believe what they want? and we can discuss these things cant we? i'm not trying to sell my point of view to anyone, and generally distrust people that try really hard to do that
in the end though, we all die alone, and have to think about what that means to us personally. and the rest is faith and the choices we make.
how does this relate to psytrance? i think that there is now a fine line between this and pop music, and the meat is the message.
me personally, ketamine or coke, i take the ketamine any day. fuck the ego, i like the id better. but thats just my personal view. i think the western world could use a little less ego, and that would make things better, but am not making any bets that it will happen. i am a realist after all..
(but am i the only one that got the sarcasm in the 4D stuff?)
..and Bukboy, please don't take this all too personally, as discussion should always be a tool for learning. you haven't died yet, and no one really knows what happens, so indeed you may not die as you think of it. know what i mean?
we should celebrate our beliefs, whatever they are, through discussion, music, shouting peace, living together in communes, sucking the corporate dick, or just living the ordinary life. but whatever, nothing is wrong with that. thats part of human 'novelty'
Gamma Riders EP out now on iTunes and Amazon.com!
The Daleks : www.myspace.com/thedaleksupreme
A-Boys : www.myspace.com/akibaboys |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 14:20
|
The Daleks - Every1 Is not pretty much right.
Only the "naysayers" here have to produce evidence that theyre right. Every1 else hides in the typical religious shroud of belief and faith is above needing to prove itself. It just IS.
The ridiculous things that people believe that have nothing going for them. Y Y Y Y Y?
All the "yaysayers" have ignored everything Ive said as if it was too obviously wrong to even contemplate. Logic is not used to argue anything. Im just wrong + bullshit + I like fairies is every single response. WTF
Culturalist imperialism? U have beliefs that fly in the face of logic. I dont have to agree with that, and I dont have to keep quiet about it. |
|
|
|
the daleks
The Daleks
Started Topics :
34
Posts :
584
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 15:37
|
Quote:
|
The ridiculous things that people believe that have nothing going for them. Y Y Y Y Y?
|
|
actually most believers, the fabulous James Browne being the first that pops into mind, thank God as being their first and foremost source of inspiration. Converesely, these people usually have alot going for them.
i didnt see one person on this thread saying i believe in fairies, so it is kind of funny that you say that. you are very passionate, but i dont see about what, other than 'naysaying' in general
it would be good for you to learn your eastern philosophy a little better. the first and best example is karma, and what comes around goes around. don't believe it? do something nice for someone, and see if it comes back to you. and also, alot of the philosophers you mentioned, Hume for one, have roots in eastern logic. furthermore, buddhism follows a strict logic, that is meant to be thought provoking, in the search for the truth
what are my beliefs that fly in the face of LOGIC? i dont think i mentioned anything in particular. please elaborate
last the best example of fairies, and cosmic bullshit - the big bang. describe that for me
really, i dont mean to pick a bone with you, but i dont have to keep quite about what i dont agree with either.
Gamma Riders EP out now on iTunes and Amazon.com!
The Daleks : www.myspace.com/thedaleksupreme
A-Boys : www.myspace.com/akibaboys |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jan 12, 2007 15:57
|
Gr8.
Fairies is just a metaphor I use to express anything mystical that has no argumentation to support it. Dont mean anything besides that.
Although Kharma is a very attractive concept of universal justice Im afraid I find a lot of injustice in the world so no, Kharma I reject as fantasy. Just becoz u see some justice in the world doesnt mean everything is just, and certainly doesnt mean kharma is real. Again its an attractive concept, which fails common logic.
Do u mean that eastern philosophy comes up with a formulation for logic or uses logic like any writer? Please point me in the direction of the former.
I dont really subsribe to any scientific theories absolutely, but relatively the big bang has a lot more observable evidence going for it than say the personal god or 4dimensional drug travelling.
No bone picked. respect my arguments and respond logically and we'll both have a gr8 time. |
|
|
|
|
