/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10153835]

>Superstition
Something is true because I think it's true

>Religion
Something is true because a figure of authority said so

>Philosophy
Something is true because it follows the rules of logic

>Science
Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true

science is the only legitimate way to understand the universe and discover new knowledge

[Anonymous No.10153838]

>>10153835
based and scipilled

[Anonymous No.10153843]

>>10153835
>science
>something is true
i thought positivism was:
>something is not false

[Anonymous No.10153844]

>>10153835
Ok,

[Anonymous No.10153846]

>>10153835
>Science
>confirmed to be true
t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.10153850]

>>10153835
>>Philosophy
>Something is true because it follows the rules of logic
Lol nope that's not philosophy's case, the truth is that philosophy is epistemically plural.

[Anonymous No.10153852]

Science can't prove anything is true. It can only prove that something is false, and by process of elimination it whittles down to the truth.

That's why everything in science is called a "theory." If science could prove something, they wouldn't need to call them theories.

[Anonymous No.10153897]

>>10153835

[Anonymous No.10153915]

>>10153850
yeah, bro, that's what i was gonna say mannnnn
*bubble bubble bubble*
like, i could
*COUGH COUGHNCOUGH COUGH*
i could say "i exist eternally" cuz, like, mannnn, once i exist then i ALWAYS exist like abstractly mannnn right? fuckin once i die i'm gonna keep on keepin on mannnnnn

[Anonymous No.10153944]

>>10153835
>Superstition
Something is true because I heard it's true

>Religion
Something is true because a figure of authority said so

>Philosophy
Something is true because I think it should be true

>Science
Something is likely true because it best fits the tests and observations

science is the only legitimate way to understand the universe and discover new knowledge

IFTFY

[Anonymous No.10153949]

>Memory
>Mathematics
>Rationale
>Thought

Science is based on shit you cant prove exist.

[Anonymous No.10153950]

>>10153835
bait

[Anonymous No.10153951]

>>10153949
but it just werks
>checkmate

[Anonymous No.10153952]

>>10153915
Retard.

[Anonymous No.10153954]

>>10153897
>t.

[Anonymous No.10153982]

>>10153954
rofl fedora hats what a great meme

[Anonymous No.10153986]

>>10153952
because why? because you don't get that it's ironic or because i'm making fun of philosophy and its stoner-like "yeah mannnn whatever that's fuckin cool brah" methodology, and you have no argument?

[Anonymous No.10154278]

>>10153835
Science is convenient. It doesn't prove anything true or false.

[Anonymous No.10154430]

>>10153835
>the Big Bang and evolution have been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true

[Anonymous No.10154446]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CFuCYNx-1g

[Anonymous No.10154455]

>>10153852
Uh, no. Theories may be proven if the model improves to such a degree that it is undeniably true.

[Anonymous No.10154457]

>>10153949
Are you trolling? We can literally watch memories form in rodent brains.

[Anonymous No.10154461]

>>10154430
Yes, actually. Observing the cosmic microwave background has been done repeatedly, and it’s trivial for scientists to repeatedly observe the change in allele frequencies over time in populations of related organisms. It’s also trivial to observe the genomes of living organisms and use them to reconstruct phylogenies.

[Anonymous No.10154465]

>>10153982
>wearing fedora with a suit
classy
>>10153954
>wearing fedora with t-shirt and hoodie
fuck these people who are afraid of looking good and standing out who look like complete slobs

[Anonymous No.10154467]

>>10154465
Ever wear suspenders? Feels good, like I’m going to get pictures of Spider-Man or something,

[Anonymous No.10154470]

>>10153835
Working with these definitions. You may religiously believe in the science of others which could cause applications of your superstition to your interpretation of data. Philosophy may be a useful tool to counter these mishaps. We can make proper use of all these things. How often we find that the science we thought was true to be replaced by new truth? Or the ideas long rejected wer right all along.

[Anonymous No.10154471]

>>10154461
the cosmic microwave background doesn't prove the big bang, at best it's evidence the universe has been expanding then we all made this leap of faith and believe the entire universe was smaller than your micropenis because it's a comforting thought

[Anonymous No.10154477]

>>10154471
.......No, the cosmic microwave background was PREDICTED by Big Bang cosmology and then discovered. Big Bang cosmology itself was proposed due to the observed expansion of spacetime from the 1900’s on. The steady state model failed to be congruent with these observations, so it died and Big Bang cosmology lived on, and continues to be congruent with all observations made. A singularity at some finite time in the past is the obvious consequence of spacetime expanding, so there’s no “leap of faith”. Your hatred of science is cute.

[Anonymous No.10154498]

>>10154477
>A singularity at some finite time in the past is the obvious consequence of spacetime expanding
it really isn't tho, but keep your faith, micropenis universe guy

[Anonymous No.10154527]

>>10154498
>it really isn't tho, but keep your faith, micropenis universe guy

It really is, tho. I have no faith. Your childish insults sum up your complete lack of an argument perfectly. Probably just a troll.

[Anonymous No.10154533]

>>10154527
>A singularity at some finite time in the past is the obvious consequence of spacetime expanding
not an argument, no evidence, pure wishful thinking. shoo shoo back to whence you came redditor

[Anonymous No.10154562]

>>10154533
The evidence is irrefutable. You’re just denying it because you hate induction for whatever reason.

[Anonymous No.10154577]

>>10154562
what evidence

[literally Stalin !ZOH7fwTKsc No.10154590]

>>10153835
>science
I appears to be true therefore it is true. What I did was what I did. And what I saw was what I saw.

>science + philosophy
It appears to be true but there are known and suspected ways for its trueness to have a different meaning, and some ways for it not to be true at all. I can use this as a base for effective error control.

[Anonymous No.10154618]

>>10154577
I literally just told you. You’re a troll.

[Anonymous No.10154624]

>>10153835
>These are the people you share a board with
Please post when you have something of value to add, your showerthoughts aren't worth a thread.

[Anonymous No.10154634]

Science is:
>Observe event
>Interpret event
>Test interpretations
Repeat.

Science is not:
>consenus
>unprovable theories
>appeal to authority
>statistics
>corporate-backed research
>a closed mind to unforseen possibilities

Be vary wary of people who try to sell sci-fi and agendas as fact.

[Anonymous No.10154639]

>>10153835
Science is just a branch of philosophy, retards

[Anonymous No.10154642]

>>10153835
>wat i dont liek
>i defined as something fake and gay

>wat i do liek
>i defined as something objectively true

am i smrat now?

[Anonymous No.10154645]

>>10154618
you literally haven't. what a retard

[Anonymous No.10154656]

>>10154477
Singularity is just another word for 'this theory is wrong'

[Anonymous No.10154658]

>>10153835
You already made this thread once here: >>10115110

>superstition
>Something is true because I think it's true
No, that's literally just your opinion. Superstition is believing in something even though is hasn't been well substantiated by anything nor well argued. Examples: white privilege, male privilege, cis-hetero privilege, global white supremacy, rape culture, systemic institutionalized structural systematic oppression of minorities, marginalization, etc

>Religion
>Something is true because a figure of authority said so
No, people believe authority all the time. The vast amount of your knowledge comes from authority and not self replication or independently verified.

>Philosophy
>Something is true because it follows the rules of logic
No, that's mathematics. Philosophy is knowledge from things seeming reasonable. Examples: Aristotle saying heavy objects fall faster, men have more teeth than women, menstrual blood turns into breast milk, etc.

>Science
>Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true
Absolutely not. Science is about modeling and stamp collecting observations. Truth is unobtainable.

[Anonymous No.10154668]

>>10154658
>>Philosophy
>>Something is true because it follows the rules of logic
>No, that's mathematics. Philosophy is knowledge from things seeming reasonable. Examples: Aristotle saying heavy objects fall faster, men have more teeth than women, menstrual blood turns into breast milk, etc.
You're not wrong about math, but you do understand that logic is a branch of philosophy? So OP in his retardation is not completely wrong about a big part of philosophy being devoted to logical truths, and the system which derive these conclusions.

[Anonymous No.10154675]

>>10154658
based, redpilled and brings all the boys to the yard

[Anonymous No.10154722]

>>10154658

>systemic institutionalized structural systematic oppression of minorities
>not well substantiated

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

>No, people believe authority all the time. The vast amount of your knowledge comes from authority and not self replication or independently verified

I'm not seeing anything in your retort that proves op wrong. Many authority figures have been deified and many religions dictate that knowledge comes from the divine.

>Science is about modeling and stamp collecting observations. Truth is unobtainable.

Highly debatable, you can argue the totality of Truth is unobtainable but it is clear local truth can be accessed with enough accuracy to be 99% correct.

[Anonymous No.10154747]

>>10153944
>science is how we as humans can feel satisfied with our made up understandings of reality
ftfy

if you think science is anything else but blindly believing in biased tests and methods then you're just being religious about it

>philosophy cares about truth
No serious 20th/21st century philosopher cares about truth anymore.

>>10154278
underrated post

[Anonymous No.10154751]

>>10154668
>but you do understand that logic is a branch of philosophy

That's as dumb as saying discrete math is a branch of computer science.

[Anonymous No.10154754]

>>10153835
> >Science
>Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true
You are letting the repeated testing and observing be the rules of your logic.
>Science is philosophy
You are letting the rules of your logic be the authority figure.
>Philosophy is religion
You are free to choose whatever authority figure to listen to according to what you think is true.
>Religion is superstition

[Anonymous No.10154756]

>>10154722
>Highly debatable

No.

[Anonymous No.10154772]

>>10154722
>en.m.wikipedia
>.m.
Kill yourself, phone poster.

>>Redlining
>niggers steal
>companies don't want to deal with it
>niggers don't pay debts
>banks don't want to deal with it
>NPCs: OMG RACISM!!!

Judging people based on the content of their character that they are in full control of is never wrong. Don't blame the victims (companies) but the victimizers.

[Anonymous No.10154777]

>>10154772
>>Redlining
>poor people steal
>companies don't want to deal with it
>poor people don't pay debts
>banks don't want to deal with it
>NPCs: OMG ELITISM!!!
ftfy. btw redlining is more about segregation

[Anonymous No.10154827]

>>10154756

You do know that the question of if a "sub-set" can judge and have full knowledge of a it's "set" is still in the realm of philosophy right? Also yes, violations of non-locality have been shown in experiments and several technologies but it does not inherently deny the accuracy local truth. What the violations asserts is the possibility that events can not be properly ordered in a set fashion. Thus arrow of time is violated and the totality of Truth is not obtainable.

>>10154772

>Because areas were redlined residents in them were unable to obtain loans to improve their homes or get loans to move to a different area. Obviously, the neighborhoods had zero investment while neighborhoods around them improved. When the GI Bill was created during World War II, veterans who once lived in redlined areas were unable to get zero interest loans to build new homes like the rest of the returning soldiers. This forced them to stay in the areas that were poor and uninvested in while the rest of America was growing and moving to the suburbs.[21] Around the same time the GI Bill was created, the Federal Highway Act was also created. Because the areas that were redlined were so poor, many cities chose to destroy these areas to create the highways. The residents were displaced and forced to move into different uninvested neighborhoods while their homes and businesses were destroyed by the highways

You can't even use the "content of character" argument because Minority Veterans who served in the military were also discriminated.

[Anonymous No.10154829]

>>10154777
>>poor people steal

Not as much as niggers.

[Anonymous No.10154836]

>>10154772
Go back to your containment board.

[Anonymous No.10154970]

>>10153835

[Anonymous No.10155361]

>>10154470
>>10154590
>>10154634
>>10154747
>>10154970
Yep.

[Anonymous No.10155366]

>>10153835
Based and redpilled anon

[Anonymous No.10155381]

>>10153835
>Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true
Utterly wrong. You literally can't babby's first science.

>Something is true because I can't prove it's wrong
FTFY

[Anonymous No.10155384]

>>10154634
>you can interpret a great multitudes of events without statistics
>you can design cmplex experiments and have large team implement them in practice without consensus
>implying

that's how I know you will never work at CERN.

[Anonymous No.10155389]

>>10154751
Logic as a word and as a discipline was literally invented by the philosopher Aristotles. It's only in the past two centuries that it has taken an explicitly mathematical form, and even then it is still largely a philosophical topic.

[Anonymous No.10155404]

>>10154751
See the post about Aristotle, logic as a branch was then further refined by Frege and Russell. Have you taken a class in logic before?

[Anonymous No.10155489]

earths flat

100 years pass

nvm my bad is round

1000 years pass

fug my bad its actually 4th dimensional

10000 years pass

...nigga fuk dis...


(science everyone)

[Anonymous No.10155736]

>>10155389
>was literally invented by the philosopher Aristotles

Which took us 2000 years to exit the dark age he ushered in.

[Anonymous No.10155746]

>>10154836
b8 or have you never lived near a large group of blacks?

[Anonymous No.10157229]

>>10153835
>>Science
>Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be tru

quite an assumption you got there little boy, you just add the word "confirmation" to doctrine you like.

[Anonymous No.10157320]

>>10155736
It's plato that killed science, lrn2history.

[Anonymous No.10157337]

>>10153954
>>
>>10153982

[Anonymous No.10157726]

>imagine being so retarded that you make a thread like this

[Anonymous No.10159527]

>>10154829
niggers are poor though

[Anonymous No.10159546]

>>10154642
lel

[Anonymous No.10159550]

>>10153949

What? some of our best scientific principles are rooted in mathematic concepts which are absolute in conception. There is no argument against them.

Even if you buy into the whole holistic argument that our perceptions are easily deceived and we can't trust our instruments or our senses the answer has and always will be absolute concepts like mathematics.

[Anonymous No.10159954]

>>10153835
Observations make something likely true, not 100% true.
And philosophy is logic limited to individual viewpoints

[Anonymous No.10160045]

>>10159550
>There is no argument against them
There are, you just don't know about them.

[Anonymous No.10161279]

>>10153986
>philosophy and its stoner-like "yeah mannnn whatever that's fuckin cool brah"

Absolute imbecile

[Anonymous No.10161281]

>>10153949
You just proved science is false wow i guess that engineering degree was worth it after all

[Anonymous No.10161291]

>>10154467
Honestly wanna get a few outfits where I wear suspenders. Gonna bulk up a bit more though.

[Anonymous No.10161308]

>>10159550
>What? some of our best scientific principles are rooted in mathematic concepts which are absolute in conception. There is no argument against them.

No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom

Science, including mathematics, is just another human creation, it's a constructions of our mind we stick on our environnement trying to understand it but it is in no way "absolute", it's inherently subjective and always based on a pre existing intuition (just like religion and science).

By the way If you study a bit the history of sciences you will realize that most of them are born from mysticism (indians and greeks are good examples) and that great mathematicians were often either philosopher or theologians if not straight up in the church, that's because these 3 domains are part of the realm of abstract thinking.

Now science is the most utilitarian way to explore nature (as we can extract practical application out of it) but saying that it's the "only legitimate way" like OP said is not just deluded. Kant wrote extensively about it

[Anonymous No.10161363]

[Anonymous No.10161618]

>almost no "science" contradicts united states law in the abstract sense and absolutely none in the reified sense

[Anonymous No.10161639]

>>10153835
>Something is true because it has been repeatedly tested, observed, and confirmed to be true

I can pretend to be mute and repeated testing and observation would confirm me as such, more so than most things Empiricism claims to have confirmed.

[Anonymous No.10161696]

>>10153835

[Anonymous No.10161698]

>>10157337