Spirituality
23 Apr 07
27 Apr 07
Originally posted by sven1000So you lost out on your funding battle?
Science isn't driven by the pursuit of objective truth, it is driven by money, desire for fame, intrigue with a particular puzzle piece, desire to be right, etc... Scientists often like to portray it as pursuit of objective truth; it sounds nobler. It does have the nice feature that it is repeatable by others. People can build on past success, although o ...[text shortened]... d who pursue studies they don't believe reflect truth, simply because there is funding for it.
27 Apr 07
Originally posted by Zander 88I would agree that the scientific method works well in the appropriate venue. I'm also open to the idea that there is truth that the scientific method cannot access, which doesn't make that truth any less viable.
I'm not debating whether people are or aren't in it for the pursuit of objective truth. I fully believe your claims there. What I'm saying is that the scientific method is near bullet-proof. If your claims are false, nobody can repeat your experiment, whatever, people are going to catch it.
So, is there something fundamentally wrong with the scientific method in the abstract? I would not blame the tool for being mishandled by the worker.
27 Apr 07
Originally posted by sven1000That's downright blasphemy!
I would agree that the scientific method works well in the appropriate venue. I'm also open to the idea that there is truth that the scientific method cannot access, which doesn't make that truth any less viable.
You are hereby ordered to turn in your Scientist Card .. at least in the Spirtuality Forum venue.
Stand by for slings .. and arrows too.
29 Apr 07
Originally posted by sven1000What is this "truth" that science supposedly cannot access? And what makes you think that anyone else can access it any better?
I would agree that the scientific method works well in the appropriate venue. I'm also open to the idea that there is truth that the scientific method cannot access, which doesn't make that truth any less viable.
30 Apr 07
Originally posted by twiceaknightDon't people delude themselves into believing postiive congenial propositions more often than they delude themselves into believing negative uncongenial ones? In that sense, self-delusion is positive,
No. Self- delusion is never positive. It's negative.
However, that people self-delude may be regrettable, and hence negative, in another sense. However, I think this is a debatable proposition. I would say the matter is more complex. I would say that there is an optimal margin of self-delusion, that varies from context to context.