Secret Chief
Very strong language
See post #5Why, please?
Regards
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
See post #5Why, please?
Regards
MikeF wrote, "Scientific methods "
One has written scientific methods in plural, isn't it singular "Scientific Method", please?
Regards
Not correct, please:I think it's like saying "maths".
Not correct, please:
"I found this: The word Mathematics was first used in English in 1581, coming from the Latin word Mathematica. Since the -a suffix in Latin denotes a plural, the word was automatically pluralised when translated to English, even though the word itself is always used as a singular. The abbreviation "Math" came first."
Why is "math" always pluralized in British English but singular ...
Right, please?
Regards
So, one agrees that practically the nature of a subject/discipline changes the Methodology or the Method, and naturally/reasonably so. There is "no master key" sort of Method as long as it is systematic, it is OK.In a general sense, it is referred to as the scientific method. In a practical sense there are many scientific methods depending on the discipline, experiment and statistical analysis. For instance, a physicist, a biologist and an anthropologist are all following the scientific method even though the specific methods they use may vary radically. For this reason, publications require a methods section so that the specific methodology is communicated and in a way that it can be repeated by someone else if they choose. Or critiqued.
Whither Goest Thou, O Science!
It is not science, it is we humans who are mislead by the illusions and go astray to ruin ourselves, please. Right friends, please?
Regards
So, one agrees that practically the nature of a subject/discipline changes the Methodology or the Method, and naturally/reasonably so. There is "no master key" sort of Method as long as it is systematic, it is OK.
Right friend, please?
Regards
Let's hope that it was a typo on their part. Scientific method is not a plural. It is singular. The following is scientific method:MikeF wrote, "Scientific methods "
One has written scientific methods in plural, isn't it singular "Scientific Method", please?
Regards
Did Science approve these Methods, please? If yes, which natural discipline of Science did approve it and on what basis, please? Please quote in this connection, please?Yes, there are a wide variety of methods, and some methods are discipline specific (not all questions require a graduated cylinder to answer them). However, any method must meet specific standards to ensure the quality of the conclusions drawn. This is what professional science investigation is about, ensuring the quality of our conclusions to the best of our abilities.
Be carefully with the term systematic. One can be systematically and continually wrong.
Let's hope that it was a typo on their part. Scientific method is not a plural. It is singular. The following is scientific method:
1. Observe
2. Form a hypothesis
3. Test the hypothesis
4. Record the results
5. Form a conclusion
Did Science approve these Methods, please? If yes, which natural discipline of Science did approve it and on what basis, please? Please quote in this connection, please?
Regards
What I articulated was scientific method, and the only scientific method.paarsurrey said: ↑
MikeF wrote, "Scientific methods "
One has written scientific methods in plural, isn't it singular "Scientific Method", please?
Friend, there was no typo mistake, one may like to read post #62 where the poster appreciated my observation and presented his evidence/information/reasoning in this connection, please. Right, please?
Regards
Let's hope that it was a typo on their part. Scientific method is not a plural. It is singular.
I googled "Scientific Methods":What I articulated was scientific method, and the only scientific method.
Friend!It's not clear what you are asking. What is your definition of the word "science". What does that word mean to you?
Well poetry did in the past/does affect human life very much and as long as we have sentiments and emotions we will always be affected by it till such time the humans for their own destruction transfer our entire intelligence to the robots (AI). And then we will be inhuman just machines without sentiments and poetry and music and arts and beauty. Right friend, please?I would say that the use of the term "illusion" is more on the poetic side, but yes, for many reasons, we can be susceptible to wrong or incomplete information, and engage in faulty or incomplete reasoning, including faulty reasoning with good information. Hence the necessity for some type of quality control on any conclusions we may draw.
paarsurrey said: ↑
Whither Goest Thou, O Science!
It is not science, it is we humans who are mislead by the illusions and go astray to ruin ourselves, please. Right friends, please?
Well poetry did in the past/does affect human life very much and as long as we have sentiments and emotions we will always be affected by it till such time the humans for their own destruction transfer our entire intelligence to the robots (AI). And then we will be inhuman just machines without sentiments and poetry and music and arts and beauty. Right friend, please?
For removing scientific illusions the truthful religion helps to create balance, I understand, please. Right friend, please?
Regards
Science is a tool, whether there is "progress" or "regress" is not within its remit; so science is not "taking" us anywhere. There is no fate to it. We can develop antibiotics AND we can develop weapons of war.
paarsurrey said: ↑
Well poetry did in the past/does affect human life very much and as long as we have sentiments and emotions we will always be affected by it till such time the humans for their own destruction transfer our entire intelligence to the robots (AI).
Regards