[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 98 KB, 1030x572, IMG_1212.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16575381 No.16575381 [Reply] [Original]

Do you still find science cool or fun?

>> No.16575493

>>16575381
Yes. Nature is magical. If you don’t think this, then you don’t truly love nature, or science. You’re a boring grey blob if you don’t see the divine beauty all around.

>> No.16576057

>>16575493
People who "don’t see the divine beauty all around" are part of nature, and if you don't see their divine beauty then you're part of the problem.

>> No.16576063
File: 86 KB, 1094x1085, Organic_CMOS_logic_circuit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16576063

>>16575381
Only when it produces things that combine utility and beauty, like a guitar or an integrated circuit.

>> No.16576090

>>16575493
Magical in a mechanical way maybe, the same way an autist plays with his train kits in his 30s. It is otherwise hell and you're probably a psychopath if you enjoy it in any other way than the aforementioned

>> No.16576099

>>16576090
>Magical in a mechanical way maybe
nope. just look at the consciousness phenomenon. weird as shit. based on particle interaction and laws of this universe. fields and quantum shit and all that. it's fucking amazing.
but humans coped with their limitations by fantasizing about imaginary worlds where everything is better to help with the pain of being (currently) limited. so much so they're in some Stockholm syndrome relationship with those limitations.

>> No.16576103

>>16576099
>nope. just look at the consciousness phenomenon. weird as shit. based on particle interaction and laws of this universe. fields and quantum shit and all that. it's fucking amazing.
nobody has any (justified) idea of how consciousness works

>> No.16576118

>>16576103
it's clearly something that's permitted by the laws of this universe. based on them. are you crazy or what? it's like seeing fire and going "clearly magic, this isn't real, has nothing to do with this universe". what's wrong with some of you is your brain mush?
you can absolutely infer it's based on laws of this universe, there's no question about it. just because you don't understand how it's happening doesn't mean it's something not based on the laws of this universe. that's absolute brain rot
>nobody has any (justified) idea of how consciousness works
I do. it's based on particle interaction. it can't be any other way. you need to prove it's not if you're going to say otherwise. it's based on particle interaction like everything else. this doesn't have to be proven, it's the default state of things for anything we observe. always.
whenever we observe something new we don't go all
>holy shit this has NOTHING to do with our universe until someone proves otherwise

>> No.16576129

>>16576118
It's reasonable to think that consciousness follows natural laws, but they don't have to be the ones we currently theorize. Maybe consciousness primarily happens in another space disjoint from the observable universe that follows classical mechanics and no quantum bullshit

>> No.16576131

>>16576129
>Maybe consciousness primarily happens in another space disjoint from the observable universe
ever wondered why you so easily tend to BELIEVE that? with no proof whatsoever?
>muh intuition is better than scientific method

>> No.16576133

>>16576129
as in you not only just invented consciousness must be related to some other thing which has nothing to do with this universe, you literally invent that "thing". you pull some "another space disjoint from the observable universe" out of your ass like it clearly makes sense. you invented a whole...thing, just like that, and you're extremely comfortable with that.
bro if that doesn't seem off to you then you'll fuck up with science.

>> No.16576136

>>16576131
>>16576133
My asspull is just as valid as vaguely assuming that consciousness follows from currently known physics. There's not even any scientific proof "consciousness" exists. Maybe it doesn't exist and you just think you're conscious? Did you follow the scientific method to conclude that you are conscious?

>> No.16576137

>>16576136
>My asspull is just as valid as vaguely assuming that consciousness follows from currently known physics.
why though? what is the real reason for you just supposing that? it's pure cope and dogma, drop the shit

>> No.16576140

>>16576137
The very idea of a "consciousness" with subjective experience is dogma and intuition. In the same way, humans across many societies have intuited that consciousness is not tied to our physical bodies. Where does it go? If it existed in the matter we know about, any encoding of consciousness would quickly degrade, so it should exist in a way that it cannot interact much with the known universe.

>> No.16576147

>>16576140
>intuited that consciousness is not tied to our physical bodies
why I say it's cope. you can't use that as science. it's hope and cope, something else happens after death, and the only way primitive chimps found a way towards that was this "outside our universe other place thing". for whatever primitive reasons. that's not science. doesn't matter ALL people "feel" that, it's not science thus could be pure cope that's it. survival shit. whatever. doesn't matter. it's not science.
also don't get mad at me for invalidating that cope. it's not my fucking problem. I'm just pointing out that's not science.

>> No.16576152

>>16576147
If that's cope then so is thinking subjective experience exists. We only think it exists based on intuition.

>> No.16576154

>>16576152
doesn't matter what you call reality. what matters is the consequences of experiencing it. if I can't avoid getting hungry by thinking it's not real Idgaf about what you call it or what you think it is.
also particle interaction and shit in this universe doesn't mean you can't exist after you die here. from your perspective. just keep it science related anon that's it.

>> No.16576157

>>16576154
Then there's nothing more wondrous about consciousness than your finger being itchy.

>> No.16576212

>>16576099
>>nope. just look at the consciousness phenomenon. weird as shit. based on particle interaction and laws of this universe.
Purely conjectural. Atheists can't prove this.

>> No.16576213

>>16576118
>>it's clearly something that's permitted by the laws of this universe.
how do unmaterial laws outside the universe act on a matter inside the universe?

>> No.16576268

>>16576212
it's not only atheists saying it and whoever says it doesn't need to prove it. it's the default state of things for anything in this universe.
>>16576213
>how do unmaterial laws outside the universe
no such thing, it's crazy talk.

>> No.16576321

>>16576118
"laws of this universe"
A reminder that scientific "laws" are just our best models for explaining observations. There is no stone tablet stuck at the centre of the galaxy that says it must be this way.
>it can't be any other way
Until you explain the particle interactions Jesus used to make water into wine, I'm not buying it.
Or Cartesian dualism. Thought and consciousness are distinctly separate from matter, as one is proven, per se illustrata, the other is inferrable only through the first, through senses that everybody knows to lie. (As in dreams, hallucinations, etc)

>> No.16576375

>>16575381
Yes, but I’ve long-since accepted that I’m never going to be in a position to solve for than minor mysteries in my field.

>> No.16576396

>>16575381
Yes but im an idiot and have accepted that my place is to never solve any real problems or creatively contribute to anything. I'm a spectator, through and through.

>> No.16576449

>>16576321
>Until you explain the particle interactions Jesus used to make water into wine, I'm not buying it.
the absolute state of /sci/ence

>> No.16577418

>>16575493
FPBP
Modern day "scientists" are soulless, emotionless Borg drones

>> No.16577427

>>16575381
science(tm) is fake and gay but observing the natural world and figuring out how it worls will always be cool

>> No.16578165

>>16575381
Yes but exclusively in things that aren't in my field

>> No.16578315

>>16575381
>1920s paleontologist
>is a grifter who would have been hanged a century before
>2020 paleontologist
>*chitinous noises*

>> No.16578383

>>16577427
>but observing the natural world and figuring out how it worls will always be cool
thats science

>> No.16579322

>>16575381
I sure try to!

>> No.16579727

Doge memes are so gay

>> No.16579816

>>16575381
Science stopped being fun when I realized that the current approach can't solve what science pretends to solve. Just look at nutritional science: a century of detailing molecular processes just to circle around the common wisdom that humans should eat fresh plants and fresh animal products preferably not contaminated by capitalist' schemes while chronic disease keeps rising. What the fuck is science doing? Not solving any problems.

>> No.16579818

>>16575381
No. I find it interesting and required for things that are important. I grew out of cool and fun.

>> No.16579839

>>16575381
It is supercool and lots of fun.
Academia is a huge disappointment though.

>> No.16579841

>>16579816
>chronic disease keeps rising
because they diagnose them more and more
But then more urgent of your problems is that you're a commie faggot.

>> No.16579943

>>16576063
>circuit on a plastic sheet
PCB too fucking good for you? You actually want garbage that malfunctions despite not visibly breaking?

>> No.16580332

>>16579943
what if your application has odd shapes and space constraints?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIqhpxul_og

>> No.16580335

>>16580332
missed the timestamp, see from 15:00

>> No.16580538

>>16575493
>Nature is magical. If you don’t think this, then you don’t truly love nature, or science. You’re a boring grey blob if you don’t see the divine beauty all around.
I said something like this once to my old physics professor, and he freaked the fuck out at me. Do modern scientists really hate joy?

>> No.16580556

>>16579841
>The search for truth should be polluted by financial and political interests or else you're a commie and that's...le bad.
You're a jew and should kill yourself in a videogame.

>> No.16580607

I don't like science as much these days. It just had to get so stupid and cultish.

>> No.16580609

>>16578383
No it isn't. Modern science is trusting what experts told you about the natural world.

>> No.16580639

>>16575381
Yes, computer science especially. Too bad /g/ is absolutely unusable.

>> No.16580831

>>16580609
The scientific method at its simplest is literally “fuck around and find out”. Simple as.

>> No.16581171

>>16580607
>t. stupid and cultish

>> No.16581181

>>16580831
You're taking for granted that humans have the magical ability to induct and deduct. Simply experiencing without the ability to process experience with logic and reason will not lead to learning. There's an unexplained magical creativity component to science. Almost as if there's a God or hidden source of knowledge that people tap into sometimes to get Eureka moments seemingly ex nihilo.

>> No.16581184

>>16581181
problem with this perspective is it can hide something more sinister. which is you trying to define and basically say you own, if there is anything "woowoo" out there.
if it were to be scientifically proven you'd instantly go
>that's my god and I worshiped him forever and we get authority over that shit
like it matters lol. you didn't make it, you're just trying to latch on it, and control that for your benefit, if possible somehow.
hence you can never be trusted to objectively explore that region, for the benefit of everyone, like science does.

>> No.16581207

>>16581184
So you haven't figured out yet that science operates on the assumption that more knowledge = more control. Every scientific paper is written with that motivation: learning more about the body to develop medicine (control of the body), learning more about the psyche to develop therapy (mind control), learning more about ecology to shape nature according to human values like it's all a recreational park for our amusement, learning more about chemistry to control the properties of substances, Science = control. Yet scientific breakthroughs come from somewhere out of control.

>> No.16581221

>>16581207
but science is open. I wouldn't trust religious authorities to disclose the scientific reality of some esoteric subject if its useful for them in controlling people. they'd always justify it as a "necessary evil" for some doomporn scenario avoidance.
most humans have a propensity to get as many into a bunker and lie about the dangers of the outside so they get to run their little kingdom. because they get off on the power.

>> No.16581658

>>16580556
>>The search for truth should be polluted by financial and political interests
That's not what capitalism is about. Capitalism allows people to become wealthy, so that they can fund scientific research (even if it's done by their own children)
The second half of this video describes it very well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebqAH5mLZNk
> or else you're a commie and that's...le bad.
being a commie is even worse than just bad, it's atrocious.

>> No.16581659

>>16577427
>>16580609
The Science™ isn’t science as it is. The latter is basic poking at nature, the former is “YOU WILL LISTEN TO US, WE ARE THE AUTHORITY”, which is an antithesis of the actual scientific method when true science is throwing shit at a wall, seeing if any of it sticks.

People like Neil deGrasse Tyson are poor scientists for this reason, but amazing at parroting scientific information.

>> No.16582006

>>16576099
Humans are terrified of seeing the magic in things. That, or they're just unsatisfied pieces of shit who take everything for granted.

>> No.16582210

>>16582006
humans use science to debunk grifters