Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Did you take it with a grain of salt?
What method did you use to assure your interpretation of the evidence, was based on science and not your personal desires to believe a certain story?
What you believe to be true based on what exactly?
Is the purpose of science to continue questioning everything indefinitely?
OR
Is the purpose of science to continue questioning everything until an undeniable truth is found?
If the purpose is the former, then how can any individual ever know if they are correct in their beliefs about reality?
If the purpose is the latter, then wouldn't each individual be expected to accept the undeniable truth?
IMO, the purpose of science is to question everything, not necessarily find the truth. I find this to be an irrational way to figure out reality.
The most rational way to view reality is to question it with the intent of finding the truth.
Thoughts?
That is vague.
Experiences of what exactly?
Experiences of what I perceive to be reality.
Experiences of what I perceive to be reality.
What would you consider to be mostly likely the true reality in this situation:
Lets say you have a loved one and upon a routine physician visit, the physician discovers a lump in their lymph nodes. The physician recommends of series of diagnostic tests to determine what the lump is; petscan, ct scan and a biopsy of the lump itself. Upon viewing the results, the physician states it is a cancerous tumor and if you start treatment (chemo, radiation) within 2 weeks, you have an excellent chance of long term survival. If you do not begin treatments, it is likely the cancer will cause death within 9-12 months. The physician claims, based on his experience in dealing with similar diagnosis, this is the best course and he or she cites scientific studies of similar patients to support his view.
You go on to get 4 other opinions from well trained oncologists and they all confirm the original physicians recommendations as clearly the best course of action. You then visit a pastor and the pastor claims, based on his experience, praying to God would be the best course of action to cure the cancer and not following the physicians advice.
Based on the two separate opinions based on each person's experience, which course would you think to be most accurate reflection of true reality and why?
I agree.By itself, experience is a terrible model for assessing reality, fraught with Black Swan problems.
Experiences of what I perceive to be reality.
What exactly are you trying to determine by asking me this? Have I not answered your questions to your satisfaction? Are you trying to determine if I'm a rational person or not?
In this example you're assuming the physicians are rational people and the pastor is an irrational idiot. I don't think all pastors are irrational idiots like you do. I think the pastor would rationally advise me to see a physician if my relative had a lump in their lymph nodes. Why? Because rational Christians believe medical technology is a gift from God, why wouldn't we use it?
Does it make you uncomfortable that often times Christians are very rational people and sometimes they even point things out that you haven't thought of? If Christians or Christianity in general didn't interest you then you wouldn't be here.
Not really. But the people who profess to abide by it usually ignore it except where it suits their political agenda.Is science irrational?
By itself, experience is a terrible model for assessing reality, fraught with Black Swan problems.
Okay. By way of example, do you consider yourself to be a supporter of homosexual rights? I don't need a big long digression on why you believe what you do. A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.Examples, with evidence to support this claim.
Is the purpose of science to continue questioning everything indefinitely?
OR
Is the purpose of science to continue questioning everything until an undeniable truth is found?
If the purpose is the former, then how can any individual ever know if they are correct in their beliefs about reality?
If the purpose is the latter, then wouldn't each individual be expected to accept the undeniable truth?
IMO, the purpose of science is to question everything, not necessarily find the truth. I find this to be an irrational way to figure out reality.
The most rational way to view reality is to question it with the intent of finding the truth.
Thoughts?
Gotcha. Thanks!Yes, I am a firm believer in equal rights for all citizens.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?