Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
No, Mr. Ponky. I'm curious about human behavior; especially the Abbie Normals. Why else do you think I spend so much time with you, Mason and Sybil?
Scientism
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
No, Mr. Ponky. I'm curious about human behavior; especially the Abbie Normals. Why else do you think I spend so much time with you, Mason and Sybil?
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
Yet you don't even know what the DSM is.
Funny.
(Even funnier that you were so stupid as to say this out loud JUST AFTER I GOT DONE SHOWING EVERYONE YOU WERE A FRAUD AND DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE DSM WAS!)
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I know what it is, Ponky, I just never use it. Call me mean, but watching people have a conniption is one means of interrogating them to see how they react. The slang is "pushing their buttons". Doing it to friends is wrong, but doing it to anyone not a friend, especially trolls, is very interesting to me.Yet you don't even know what the DSM is.
Funny.
(Even funnier that you were so stupid as to say this out loud JUST AFTER I GOT DONE SHOWING EVERYONE YOU WERE A FRAUD AND DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE DSM WAS!)
People are their base selves when drunk/inebriated or angry. High emotions such as love or anger, distort a person's ability to reason. It's very difficult to make someone love another, but making them angry is relatively easy if they are stupid, ignorant or inebriated. Once they reach that state of mind, it's easier to manipulate them and/or extract information.
Now tell me what you remember most from your psychology class, Perry. I'm listening.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
I know what it is, Ponky, I just never use it. Call me mean, but watching people have a conniption is one means of interrogating them to see how they react. The slang is "pushing their buttons". Doing it to friends is wrong, but doing it to anyone not a friend, especially trolls, is very interesting to me.
People are their base selves when drunk/inebriated or angry. High emotions such as love or anger, distort a person's ability to reason. It's very difficult to make someone love another, but making them angry is relatively easy if they are stupid, ignorant or inebriated. Once they reach that state of mind, it's easier to manipulate them and/or extract information.
Now tell me what you remember most from your psychology class, Perry. I'm listening.
FRAUD! LOLOLOL
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
It's good to see neither of us needs a job, eh, Ponky? LOL Sad you don't remember anything from your one psychology class.
How long have you been unemployed or retired?
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
I know what the DSM is. I've even read parts of it. And guess what it DOESN'T sound like? You diagnosing people.
LOL.
Unlike you I've heard of mental defects that AREN'T just the standard psychoses you hear about on Maury Povich shows.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I'm sure you do, Ponky. Did your shrink read it to you?I know what the DSM is.
I've even read parts of it.
And guess what it DOESN'T sound like? You diagnosing people. LOL.
Unlike you I've heard of mental defects that AREN'T just the standard psychoses you hear about on Maury Povich shows.
A good way to learn, son.
LOL No doubt.
I've never watched Maury Povich, but thanks for the confession that you have a lot of time on your hands during the day, Ponky.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
Don't beat yourself up, Doc. Everyone already knows it.
No. Where science ends, metaphysics and ontology begin.
Physics ends at the formulation of the immutable natural laws of the cosmos. But science as we know it can offer no theoretical explanation for the origin or logical necessity of these immutable laws. They are simply accepted as true.
Yakuda
Verified User
Scientism like my gender changes because of how I "feel". The scientism of feelings!
Does MAGA think about anything other than transgenders and woke drag shows?
I never thought about them very much.
Yakuda
Verified User
No but when imbeciles try to preach the wonders of science and scientism I'd like then to show me the science of "feeling" like another gender.
This tactic of leftist is like someone saying, "If I have to explain it to you..." all that means is they haven't got a fucking clue what their talking about.
That's never bothered me. Human values and cultural norms aren't neccesarily all based on scientific laws or equations.
There is no mathmatical equation or scientic law that explains humans affinity for aesthetic beauty, art, or music.
I think getting back to the OP, it's preposterous to believe science is the source of all knowledge.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Well done and agreed.
Science is about measuring and quantifying. What can't be measured or quantified is difficult study via the scientific method.
There's some overlap like studying the psychological differences between liberal and conservative minds, but, like philosophy, that quickly moves into areas that can't be measured.
evince
Truthmatters
intuition, contemplation, and imagination have everything to do with scientific study and findings
It's true that creativity and intuition is a part of scientific speculation and hypothesizing
But at the end of the day if it lacks quantification and predictive explanatory power, it's not science.
I think you're right
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Agreed imagination and creativity aren't quite quantifiable and, therefore, not science, but agreed they are necessary for human science since that's where the spark comes from.
This link discusses human creativity which can be measured to an extent, but why the human mind can turn nothing into something such as an idea is still a mystery. My understanding is that the right hemisphere of the brain is the more creative side and the source of most non-verbal dreams. The left is subdivided into segments for language, math and other linear skills. Human beings seem to maximize themselves when they use both sides even if it's not clearly understood how the right brain does what it does.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/creativity
Original is the mystery part but building upon another's idea can be either original or experienced/training-based.
BTW, although interesting, this article is more about how certain ideas came to be and built upon over time. It's a SmithMag version of James Burke's "Connections" tv series.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/where-do-new-ideas-come-from-180965202/
Where Do New Ideas Come From?
With close study, the genealogies of even the most original ideas can be traced
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Why is it so important to differentiate science from philosophy?
Science and philosophy draw from the same well of logic and inference.
All this talk about "feelings" and "freedom" and whatever else you think can't possibly be quantified, can be. Maybe not yet but soon. We already do fMRI's and PET scans to see the in-real-time functioning of the human brain. We already know some of the areas of the brain responsible for the sense of "self" and we can see how that is altered by altering the physical brain (there are people who, after certain regions are damaged have a distinct change in sense of self).
Yes it is crazy complex to imagine that a mass of neurons trading a few small molecules between them along with an electrical charge could result in feelings like "love of art" or "appreciation of a sunset", but that's exactly what is happening.
Why is that so scary? Why does it have to be "something more"? And if there is something more, how on earth do you know it's there if it has no physical analogues? You are a physical creature and without your physical brain there simply IS NO "art appreciation" or "sunset appreciation" or "understanding of freedom". So the answer MUST lie within the physical brain.
I think it is very much a case of discounting the power of that unit on your shoulders.
Science and philosophy draw from the same well of logic and inference.
All this talk about "feelings" and "freedom" and whatever else you think can't possibly be quantified, can be. Maybe not yet but soon. We already do fMRI's and PET scans to see the in-real-time functioning of the human brain. We already know some of the areas of the brain responsible for the sense of "self" and we can see how that is altered by altering the physical brain (there are people who, after certain regions are damaged have a distinct change in sense of self).
Yes it is crazy complex to imagine that a mass of neurons trading a few small molecules between them along with an electrical charge could result in feelings like "love of art" or "appreciation of a sunset", but that's exactly what is happening.
Why is that so scary? Why does it have to be "something more"? And if there is something more, how on earth do you know it's there if it has no physical analogues? You are a physical creature and without your physical brain there simply IS NO "art appreciation" or "sunset appreciation" or "understanding of freedom". So the answer MUST lie within the physical brain.
I think it is very much a case of discounting the power of that unit on your shoulders.