Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 256 KB, 2047x788, chad rationalist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10377884 No.10377884 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Please don't tell me you /sci/fags are against believing in God.

>> No.10377891

>>10377884
too bad there is no scientific evidence

>> No.10377895
File: 45 KB, 590x527, downloadfile-33.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10377895

>>10377891
>fetishizing science
lmao

>> No.10377905

>>10377891
Science doesn't concern itself with truth.

>> No.10377924

>>10377895
>>10377905
there are plenty other boards for you guys, i’d assume for you two a good choice would be >>>/mlp/

>> No.10377933

>>10377924
Science doesn't concern itself with truth though that has never been the purpose of Empiricist epistemology you fucking dunce. kys

>> No.10377939

another dumb pseudoironic spamming trip to filter, thanks. sage, hide, and move on

>> No.10377948

>>10377933
sorry godfag, not science, pick another board. >>>/x/

>> No.10377962

>>10377948
I don't believe in god you fucking moron, I am speaking of the category of epistemology that is "empiricism" and that it does not, never has, and never will concern itself with "truth" that is not it's purpose you utter fucking ignorant moron.
Rationalism is the epistemic philosophy concerning itself with truth, Empiricism doesn't care at all about truth. Learn about the philosophies underlying your field of study or kys.

>> No.10377965

>>10377962
would >>>/his/ work for you then? please stop off topic posting here

>> No.10377973

>>10377965
No. "scientific evidence" is not the end all be all of research. In fact, it's way weaker than rational deductions. Meaning, if you could prove rationally that a God did/did not exist, you would not need a single shred of so called "scientific evidence" for "confirmation".
This board is for both Rationalist and Empiricist epistemology (it's science AND math) so threads like the OP do belong here.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
reCAPTCHA
Action