Go Back   Science Forums
View Single Post
Old 10-13-2005   #30 (permalink)
Doctordick's Avatar
Doctordick
Explaining


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: Defining the nature of rational discussion!

What problem? The problem is that the entire body of squirrel conclusions underlying all our logic deductions constitutes, from an objective scientific position, a fundamentally insupportable hypothesis . At the same time that same body of conclusions constitute the fundamental basis of any logical reasoning which can be developed. If you cannot comprehend the difficulty with that state, you simply haven't thought the issue out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qfwfq
I have long been aware of that but there's not much you can do about it.
That sounds like you recognize the problem but decided long ago that it wasn't an issue worth thinking about. That seems to be the general attitude of the scientific community. At least it conforms perfectly with the reaction I have always received from the academy. There is never "much you can do about it" if you make no attempt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qfwfq
What you maybe don't see is that logic and math aren't concerned with reality at all.
Now that is a rather sweeping statement isn't it? I rank it right there with magic: the essence of magic is misdirection of attention and it is my experience that the scientific community seems always to use such a maneuverer whenever it wants to deflect attention from issues they have difficulty explaining. (Now that is merely an opinion so please don't take me to task for it.)

Firstly, your comment certainly depends on the definition of the word "reality" and, secondly, it depends very much on exactly what you mean by the phrase "concerned with". Is physics concerned with reality? And, if it is, how far do you think you could get with physics if you removed both logic and math from the mix of tools you are to be concerned with?

If you will not recognize the validity of my complaint and insist on refusing to consider objective examination of the difficulty it seems to me that any attempt to go further is somewhat a waste of my time. The solution is neither trivial nor easy to communicate and takes an attention span somewhat beyond what seems to be the average. Unless you are ready to put some serious thought into the issues I present, I would prefer you just let me know before I spend too much time fighting a useless battle against willful ignorance. However, if you are ready to put a little serious thought into what I have to say, I am prepared to show you some very interesting facts.

Have fun -- Dick

Knowledge is Power
and the most common abuse of that power is to use it to hide stupidity

PS. I am off to Biloxi for a few days and will not be back until sometime next week.

Last edited by Doctordick; 10-13-2005 at 03:04 PM.. Reason: Adding a post script.
Reply With Quote
 
» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network