/sci/ - Science & Math

Rights have largely replaced Duties.
This is a bad thing.

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

I think that the aims of the game of science are something like the following:

1. If the scientist is to play the game of science, the scientist must attempt to solve problems. 'Problems' are, in part, situations where expectations and observation-reports clash, but on a more general level, situations where a body of knowledge is incoherent. The scientist, then, wants his expectations and observation-reports to agree with one another in all cases.

2. To solve this dispute between expectation (scientific theory) and observation-reports, one must determine whether the theory of the observation-report is false, then revise either of the two. In other words, the scientists must weed out false theories so as to correct their mistakes, in some cases correcting their lower-order theories about observations.

3. It would be very easy for the scientist to weed out all sorts of trivial false theories, such as "all of the spoons on this here table are dirty," yet these theories are so limited in scope as to be uninteresting to the scientist. Thus, trivial theories are not as interesting to the scientist as more general, more predictive theories.

4. Whenever a theory has been eliminated, a new theory must be chosen to take its place. This new theory must explain all the past successes of the superseded theory, and also make novel predictions about future events. It is best to choose a theory that is as interesting as possible, for uninteresting theories are not suitable replacements for superseded theories. Some of the most interesting theories are strictly universal statements ("all x are y").

If our minds are the product of evolution, then we have little reason to trust their epistemic reliability. Evolution doesn’t care about what’s true, it only cares about what will further our survival and reproduction.

Charles Darwin himself expressed this concern:
>But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?

Evolution and metaphysical naturalism, coupled together, appear to be self-defeating.

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist’s circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.

If evolution is true why doesn't a Millipede have a million legs?

>>1374963
By the way... I'm not the faggot who trolls with these. I'm just the faggot who thinks they complement any post in a humorous way.

Science typically encourages overdevelopment of intellectual skills at the price of emotional and spiritual atrophy.

a) If life or the remains of life are found beyond the earth,
b) then life would be a common phenomenon.
c) Therefore, it would be the product of natural processes.
d) Therefore, life would not be the product of supernatural process(es) or agent(s).

e) Therefore, the Christian claim that human beings are especially important to God is highly implausible.
f) Therefore, the Christian claim that God was incarnated as a human being (as opposed to one of the other myriad forms of life) is likewise highly implausible.

Reason is merely the process of deriving conclusions from premises. To make a cult of this human faculty and place it at the center of human life is completely arbitrary, and seems bizarre to most people. It also, incidentally, makes a person rather unbearable as a social companion.

Cosmic manifestation is entropic, not evolutionary.

Whatever shape it takes, and whatever the symbols or language it might employ, a true cosmology, by virtue of its conformity with metaphysical and theological principles, must be such as to make the natural a means of support for our awareness of the supernatural, whence nature proceeds and upon which it is permanently and perpetually dependent.

I don't know
lol

You are now aware that animal taxonomies are sometimes contested by experts..

>Scientific models don't directly correspond to reality.

Sort of like myths?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-miller/dating-advice-how-to-date_b_596496.html

>Only matter exists

Prove it

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/04jun_swef/

This coming Solar Storm could change the disposition of forces as they now stand. Right now things are way too tight, too deterministic. This throws in the element of chaos that could give our peoples room to move. It also means everyone else on a mission has room to move as well, of course, whether that's murderous blacks or Islamo-borg etc, but that's a worthy trade-up situation instead of a long slow, "quiet" ignominious slide into oblivion. White people tend to prepare better too. The rest will tend to starve and cravenly "eat eachother", oh and make desperate attacks against heavily armed white homes. Of course, in a poofter country like my own we'd cop a beating from the heavily armed swarthoid masses for a time until whites got their act together, but what are you going to do.

Explaining matter with matter is ultimately a circular endeavour.

It is the illusion of modern experimentalism to believe that a theory can be proved by facts whereas in reality the same facts can always be explained equally well by a number of different theories.

Gnostic atheist anarcho-primitivist libertarian reporting in.