Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
^^^
Claims to have a science PhD.
Scientism
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Claims to have a science PhD.
Where science ends is where your philosophy threads start....with a little overlap.
Too right you are. Where science ends, metaphysics begins.
I've always thought deeply original ideas are not common, and most of what we are dealing with is derivative.
Philosophy of mind is a great topic I am just beginning to wrap myself around
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
All of which is within human capabilities.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Why? It's one thing to keep reinventing the wheel, which would be derivative, but to keep making better wheels is not. It's simply building upon previous knowledge.
Several years ago when I was taking night welding classes, the shop had two plasma cutters. A fellow student built a wheeled stand for one of them using angle iron and steel mesh. Since actually making something was more fun than simply welding pieces of steel together, and the shop provided the materials, after looking over the other student's effort, made one too. Mine was better and this ticked off the first student. I pointed out that he had the idea first, I simply improved on his idea. That mollified him a bit, but he had to think about it. Kinda like Perry does when tossing him a new idea.
You're right that incremental progress and insights are very important.
Especially in areas of design, engineering, technology.
I think the transition from the F4 phantom to the F35 raptor was a leap in incremental improvement.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Good example. The technological advances which helped make the F-4, such as wind tunnels and jet engines, were updated in making the F-35; CAD and improved jet engines. A lot of the higher tech is making lighter, stronger metal alloys or ceramics which can take high temps. Technology builds upon previous technology. If something pushed us back, such as a supervolcano or impact event, the level of flying tech could fall back too such as tube and fabric airplanes with reciprocating engines.
The designers of fourth generation jet technology are on the cutting edge of the engineering professions.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
The scramjet tech is very 21st century. Not an engineer, but my understanding is that it's the temps and stresses on the engine that require highly specialized materials. This puts it out of reach of most countries since they lack the tech to make these materials.
Example; Russia has been using hypersonic missiles in Ukraine. Even if Ukraine captured one intact, it's unlikely they would reverse engineer it and make their own simply because they lack the technical industrial capability to manufacture the materials. Instead, they give it to us. LOL
^^^^Can't substantively respond to my post. LOL.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
^^^
Runs from the truth. Sad.
Port Tack
Verified User
Port Tack
Verified User
So the bible is lying when it says that?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
For sane, honest people who actually graduated from High School and above:
https://www.ponderingphilosopher.com/the-difference-between-philosophy-and-science/
The Difference Between Philosophy and Science
Philosophical vs scientific arguments differ in the kind of knowledge that is being discussed. Although science provides us with mathematical equations, probabilities, and descriptions of how things are, philosophy is concerned with things that are more abstract. A natural science can only study nature, which is why it cannot study anything supernatural. A philosophical move must be made to move from probability to cause. This distinction is especially important when considering questions such as the existence of God....
....While philosophy makes progress by cycles, science follows the scientific method. It makes predictions and experiments to test their theories. As such, scientific progress is measured by the accuracy of predictions and the applicability of the theories. However, philosophy is not without its merits, but neither should science be ignored entirely. For the most part, science is the better choice when it comes to the ultimate goal of human life. It’s a slog that requires much more effort and time than it takes to experiment in order to gain knowledge.
The debate over philosophy vs science relates to the debate about the role of philosophy in our lives. In many ways, philosophy is an expression of humanity, but some people say that it cannot. A common misconception is that philosophy and science are mutually exclusive. Philosophical studies must be complemented by one another, not mutually exclusive. It’s important to recognize that philosophy and science can be very different. While they are not mutually exclusive, they do share similar goals and challenges.
https://www.ponderingphilosopher.com/the-difference-between-philosophy-and-science/
The Difference Between Philosophy and Science
Philosophical vs scientific arguments differ in the kind of knowledge that is being discussed. Although science provides us with mathematical equations, probabilities, and descriptions of how things are, philosophy is concerned with things that are more abstract. A natural science can only study nature, which is why it cannot study anything supernatural. A philosophical move must be made to move from probability to cause. This distinction is especially important when considering questions such as the existence of God....
....While philosophy makes progress by cycles, science follows the scientific method. It makes predictions and experiments to test their theories. As such, scientific progress is measured by the accuracy of predictions and the applicability of the theories. However, philosophy is not without its merits, but neither should science be ignored entirely. For the most part, science is the better choice when it comes to the ultimate goal of human life. It’s a slog that requires much more effort and time than it takes to experiment in order to gain knowledge.
The debate over philosophy vs science relates to the debate about the role of philosophy in our lives. In many ways, philosophy is an expression of humanity, but some people say that it cannot. A common misconception is that philosophy and science are mutually exclusive. Philosophical studies must be complemented by one another, not mutually exclusive. It’s important to recognize that philosophy and science can be very different. While they are not mutually exclusive, they do share similar goals and challenges.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
The Bible is a perception of events 2000 years ago.
Let's be honest here; those were people who thought anyone with epilepsy were "touched by the gods". They were illiterate, superstitious and lacking in scientific knowledge. They wrote what they perceived.
Thanks.
Natural philosophy used to be what we now call science.
The 6th century BCE Ionian Presocratic philosophers were certainly speculating about the natural world and nature of reality.
Physics ends at the formulation of mathmatical natural laws. But physics does not have any theoretical explanation for the origin or logical necessity of these immutable laws. They are just accepted as true, and left at that. That's an example of where physics ends and ontology and metaphysics begin.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Facts that those without scientific minds or college educations like Perry don't understand.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
They want what they are afraid to take. It's why many homophobes are really latent homosexuals.
Is there any doubt that many of the criminal JPP Trumpers have been to prison and exposed to prison sex?
I would think anyone with a PhD who is actively well read in science journalism would know that nobody really knows how quarks and electrons in our brains result in our wide ranging subjective mental experience. Though people are constantly attempting to toss out ideas, none of which have been accepted as satisfactorily explanatory
Right.
The bible isn't science, history, or journalism.
As academic or professional disciplines, science, historical research, and journalism either didn't exist two thousand years ago, or were just in their infancy.
The bible is a collection of literary works, poems, parables which are loosely based on historical figures and generally intended to impart some kind of lesson or insight.