Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Shop
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Is there Objective Morality?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevevw" data-source="post: 76737596" data-attributes="member: 342064"><p>And how do you verify something is real and truthful.</p><p></p><p> Actually science tries to explain realities we don't know like Multiverses Simulation theory and Hologram realities. These have other dimensions that are beyond our physics and reality. </p><p></p><p>We know that reality is more than what science can describe. We can consciously experience colours and be moved by music or the sensation of taste, the agony of pain and our experience is a fact. Science says these come from the physical brain yet the evidence shows the brain cannot possibly explain or account for consciousness experiences.</p><p> </p><p> Actually its not the only method. There is testimony, logical propositions. If I testify that I love my wife how does my wife or anyone for that matter prove what I said was true. What about Math. Many theories in physics are based on Math. So technically the Math is not proving anything material but rather posing theoretical physics working to equations and formulas.</p><p></p><p> The problem is the stuff science doesn't know about like dark matter, consciousness, the origin of the universe are equated only in material terms.</p><p></p><p>So as Karl Popper said science is offering a promissory note that it will find the answers to everything in a material way even before they know it. That's the assumption.</p><p> I think your getting stuck on scientific 'proof' and missing the other ways we can know reality. For example Indigenous people practice spirituality and have done for 1,000's of years ironically up until western material science came along. They have managed to survive for 1,000's of years living in harmony with nature. The west has destroyed the planet in a couple of 100 years and everyone is stressed and worried. </p><p></p><p> But just about all historical figures didn't write things down and had others do it many years later. So that can't be a valid objection.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevevw, post: 76737596, member: 342064"] And how do you verify something is real and truthful. Actually science tries to explain realities we don't know like Multiverses Simulation theory and Hologram realities. These have other dimensions that are beyond our physics and reality. We know that reality is more than what science can describe. We can consciously experience colours and be moved by music or the sensation of taste, the agony of pain and our experience is a fact. Science says these come from the physical brain yet the evidence shows the brain cannot possibly explain or account for consciousness experiences. Actually its not the only method. There is testimony, logical propositions. If I testify that I love my wife how does my wife or anyone for that matter prove what I said was true. What about Math. Many theories in physics are based on Math. So technically the Math is not proving anything material but rather posing theoretical physics working to equations and formulas. The problem is the stuff science doesn't know about like dark matter, consciousness, the origin of the universe are equated only in material terms. So as Karl Popper said science is offering a promissory note that it will find the answers to everything in a material way even before they know it. That's the assumption. I think your getting stuck on scientific 'proof' and missing the other ways we can know reality. For example Indigenous people practice spirituality and have done for 1,000's of years ironically up until western material science came along. They have managed to survive for 1,000's of years living in harmony with nature. The west has destroyed the planet in a couple of 100 years and everyone is stressed and worried. But just about all historical figures didn't write things down and had others do it many years later. So that can't be a valid objection. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Is there Objective Morality?
Top
Bottom