TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- RJT: 1, 21 Credit Semester: 0
Pages (7): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 »

Shit, no more school until the 17th... I'm bored as hell now, and have no money because I spent it all on christmas gifts.

I LOSE!

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T try this hypothesis: evolution dictates right and wrong - what's right survives, what's wrong (eventually) dies.

I just don't know about that one. I still say there is no right or wrong just choices.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT Please re-read the definition of science that I laid out on the 2nd page.

and what of a definition to philosophy to compare with?

quote:

Originally posted by RJT IMO, yes.

Thats so weird!

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T and what of a definition to philosophy to compare with?

It (philosophy) has to hold up to the same standards. That definition is crucial to my assertion that philosophy is a science.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Thats so weird!

For sure. I actually had a metaphysics course this semester that basically tackled this issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax might is right?

that depends on the definition of "might", but if what you're referring to is pure brute strength, then it's far from being an absolute truth.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT It (philosophy) has to hold up to the same standards. That definition is crucial to my assertion that philosophy is a science.

"3. No public support; Privately Funded; Personal Affair"


scholarships, research grants, book deals...

I don't know man. When I was studying philosophy they had us taking lectures in some of the most dilapitated buildings on the whole campus. Switched to science voila state of the art labs and classrooms. I would argue that the vast majority of funding that most schools get feeds directly into the science department. But thats because they pull in huge grats for sweet sweet things like raman lasars, and 10meter telescopes.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit What if the environments wrong?. Then right is based on wrong.

right by evolution's standard is wrong by that very same standard?
does not compute.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T "3. No public support; Privately Funded; Personal Affair" scholarships, research grants, book deals...

Philosophers engaging in those activities who then not be engaged in pure science.

The difference is that philosophy requires little more than the ability to reason in order to be practiced. The kinds of cutting edge science and research being done in fields like chemistry, biology, physiology, etc. all, at one level or another, require substantial funding. Money rarely comes "no strings attached," and therefore those fields of study are far more likely not to meet the criteria laid out in my definition of science.

It's not that philosophy can't fall prey to the same problems as other sciences, it's just that it doesn't seem to occur nearly as often.

quote:

Originally posted by Zild I don't know man. When I was studying philosophy they had us taking lectures in some of the most dilapitated buildings on the whole campus. Switched to science voila state of the art labs and classrooms. I would argue that the vast majority of funding that most schools get feeds directly into the science department. But thats because they pull in huge grats for sweet sweet things like raman lasars, and 10meter telescopes.

rjt said he has no intention of quantifying purity levels, so that's irrelevant

Stephen Hawking doesn't need any fancy equipment to do his thing. He's one of my heroes.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT Philosophers engaging in those activities who then not be engaged in pure science. The difference is that philosophy requires little more than the ability to reason in order to be practiced. The kinds of cutting edge science and research being done in fields like chemistry, biology, physiology, etc. all, at one level or another, require substantial funding. Money rarely comes "no strings attached," and therefore those fields of study are far more likely not to meet the criteria laid out in my definition of science. It's not that philosophy can't fall prey to the same problems as other sciences, it's just that it doesn't seem to occur nearly as often.

so you are quantifying and measuring after all

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T so you are quantifying and measuring after all

No, I'm not quantifying anything with regard to levels of funding. It's a black and white comparison. The fact that it occurs instantly erodes the legitimacy of it as a real science.

And what about mathematics? They used to force girls to major in mathematics because you don't need any funding to do research in math. Chemistry, physics, etc... was reserved for men.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T right by evolution's standard is wrong by that very same standard? does not compute.

Well evolution is based upon organisms adapting to a natural environment. Now If the environment is being altered by teh organism, natural selection is affected and thus evolution is affected by a non natural environment.

Think about how our environment is increasing in polution. Organisms will be selected towards an environment that has been manipulated to shorten life expectancy. Evolution will proceed correctly, but the environment is no longer natural, therefore the whole claus that defines natural selection and evolution is wrong and thus a wrong definition for the term cannot lead to a correct definition of evolution being a benchmark for right and wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT No, I'm not quantifying anything with regard to levels of funding. It's a black and white comparison. The fact that it occurs instantly erodes the legitimacy of it as a real science.

without quantifying, measuring, comparing.... you can't validly proclaim one thing is more x than another thing.

comparison requires measurement.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T without quantifying, measuring, comparing.... you can't validly proclaim one thing is more x than another thing. comparison requires measurement.

Fair enough, but I'll only conede the point to you based on the technicality that anything trying to prove something either "is" or "is not" would conform to your definition of quantification.

6x+3=3x+3
6x=3x
2x=x
2=1

Dude you suck balls at math. You forgot to collect like terms. X = 0. Give me a tougher one I like math.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit Well evolution is based upon organisms adapting to a natural environment. Now If the environment is being altered by teh organism, natural selection is affected and thus evolution is affected by a non natural environment.

do you realize you're saying that an organism is unnatural? lol

nature's effects being unnatural towards itself.

Everything is made up of chemicals.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT Fair enough, but I'll only conede the point to you based on the technicality that anything trying to prove something either "is" or "is not" would conform to your definition of quantification.

you already conceeded that 'impurity' occurs with philosophers aswell, hence there's obviously more than 2 modes of being in your comparison

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T you already conceeded that 'impurity' occurs with philosophers aswell, hence there's obviously more than 2 modes of being in your comparison

Which was clearly implied throughout this entire discussion. It's not as if this bears any significant impact on my philosophical construct of science.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.