Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science

From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 02/14/05 

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:11:52 -0600

Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
> Albert said:
>
>>Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
>>
>>>Albert said:
>>>
>>>>robert j. kolker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Albert wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I would prefer this wording:
>>>>>>The universe behaves according to natural laws, and is therefore
>>>>>>consistent and interconnected. Mathematics is a useful invention for
>>>>>>describing those aspects of natural law that we have observed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>We can only observe particulars. The laws of physics are universally
>>>>>qunatified propositions. Thus we do not -observe- them. We hypothesize
>>>>>them. You have stated the problem of induction. How to do you get from a
>>>>>finite set of particulars to a general law?
>>>>
>>>>I understand what you are saying, Bob. As I said in a reply to
>>>>someone else, 'law' is a consensus term that we apply to theories
>>>>that have consistently over a long time matched our observations.
>>>
>>>I agree, Albert. What we consider natural laws are simply those
>>>theorized formulas that have withstood enough experimentation that we
>>>give them an extermely high probability of being correct. I still
>>>believe that the actual natural laws are there independent of our
>>>theories and formulas.
>>
>>Such a belief is certainly understandable given the apparent
>>reliability of some theories. However, I am afraid that there
>>will never be any proof. We may still be in the Matrix.
>
> We may be in the Matrix, and yet, what evidence to we have for that, or
> reason to believe it?

No empirical evidence at all. But there are rumors. Follow the
white rabbit.

> Such a theory doesn't explain any phenomena that
> can't be explained otherwise,

Anything can be explained 'otherwise.'

> therefore I see that as an unnecessary
> conjecture.

Of course it's unnecessary. But it might be important just the same.

> Besides, if we are in some non-reality,

Who said anything about non-reality? The Matrix is a metaphor.

> there must be some
> actual reality to support it (hopefully not a human farm). It seems like
> the obvious answer, despite alternatives we can't disprove, that there
> are actually consistent natural laws whose effects we are observing.

Sure. That view is called Science. It's a belief system like
any other.

>
> It reminds me of when my brother became born-again. When I asked him
> about dinosaurs, because he rejected evolution theory for creationism,
> he said God put the fossils there to trick us and test our faith. The
> world was only 6,000 years old, but made to look much older, with a
> history that never happened. A friend of mine extended the "theory".
> According to him the entire universe was created by God thirty seconds
> ago, including you in the middle of a conversation, digesting a bagel
> that you never actually ate, with a head full of memories from a life
> that never actaully happened. You really can't prove my brother or my
> friend wrong. But, do you have any reason to even consider those
> "theories"?

In fact, I have considered your brother's beliefs. But, being
both a Christian and an evolutionist, I reject your brother's
beliefs and your friend's extension, based on my beliefs
concerning the nature of God. You reject your brother's beliefs
and your friend's extension, based on your beliefs concerning the
nature of Science.

Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, titled one of his
major works _Fear and Trembling_, an allusion to Paul's letter to
the Phillipians, 2:12 "...work out your own salvation with fear
and trembling."

Each of makes his own decisions regarding what truth is. And
actions have consequences. 

-- 
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the 
range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally 
impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."
     -- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Budds rants - was (Re: Aspertame is totally safe)
    ... No, Mack, I gave a few Scriptures to show my beliefs and that was ... > God cannot be dictated by the writings of any man or group of men. ... Christian should than any Christian I know. ... >>> fear and prejudice allow you to see. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: Religion divides us politically - text vers.
    ... serve God. ... and the government buildings to teach your religious beliefs even though you may not have had that original intention. ... The place for religion and the teaching of religion is in the home and in the Church, Synagogue, Mosque or Temple; ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: HATE CRIMES!
    ... the childish perspective of whether God watches ... Looking at religion from a child's perspective, ... WRT god beliefs, ... were created and instilled by the church. ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: HATE CRIMES!
    ... the childish perspective of whether God watches ... Looking at religion from a child's perspective, ... WRT god beliefs, ... were created and instilled by the church. ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... > he said God put the fossils there to trick us and test our faith. ... I have considered your brother's beliefs. ... major works _Fear and Trembling_, an allusion to Paul's letter to ...
    (sci.math)