Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[mikkel_the_dane]

...

"Metaphysics" is the definitions, axioms, and experiment that underlie all theory. Theory has no meaning except within this metaphysics so this means theory must be applied properly. Just as a computation of the gallons of gas your car will require to go from San Francisco to Honolulu is meaningless the "Theory of Evolution" is meaningless when applied to families or the Man on the Moon.

People who believe in scientism are improperly applying scientific theory and knowledge to all of reality. They color in all the unknowns and the unknowables with misapplied science. And then they reject all other means of knowing or reason. Their rejection of ancient knowledge and wisdom is a knee jerk reaction. Their rejection of those who don't share their beliefs is automatic.

So I am not like you and I am not like the believers in scientism.

 

[YoursTrue]

"Metaphysics" is the definitions, axioms, and experiment that underlie all theory. Theory has no meaning except within this metaphysics so this means theory must be applied properly. Just as a computation of the gallons of gas your car will require to go from San Francisco to Honolulu is meaningless the "Theory of Evolution" is meaningless when applied to families or the Man on the Moon.

Sounds reasonable to me.

People who believe in scientism are improperly applying scientific theory and knowledge to all of reality. but

I see pictures (old photos) of scientists in their laboratories. They may find/discover certain things (I mean Nobel prizes can be given out for such research) but their is limited.

They color in all the unknowns and the unknowables with misapplied science. And then they reject all other means of knowing or reason. Their rejection of ancient knowledge and wisdom is a knee jerk reaction. Their rejection of those who don't share their beliefs is automatic.

I think I understand what you're saying. Thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

"Metaphysics" is the definitions, axioms, and experiment that underlie all theory. Theory has no meaning except within this metaphysics so this means theory must be applied properly. Just as a computation of the gallons of gas your car will require to go from San Francisco to Honolulu is meaningless the "Theory of Evolution" is meaningless when applied to families or the Man on the Moon.

I looked up the word metaphysics and here's what I found:
"the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.
"they would regard the question of the initial conditions for the universe as belonging to the realm of metaphysics or religion"
abstract theory with no basis in reality."

So it's a philosophy dealing with (?) the first principles of things...?
When I heard the word metaphysics I would usually move back and not engage as if it were like from magicians or something like that. In other words, strange, not to be accepted.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I looked up the word metaphysics and here's what I found:
"the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.
"they would regard the question of the initial conditions for the universe as belonging to the realm of metaphysics or religion"
abstract theory with no basis in reality."

So it's a philosophy dealing with (?) the first principles of things...?
When I heard the word metaphysics I would usually move back and not engage as if it were like from magicians or something like that. In other words, strange, not to be accepted.

Well, i don't accept your relgion and treat it as strange and move away like it is from magicians or something like that.
So it works in both directions.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, i don't accept your relgion and treat it as strange and move away like it is from magicians or something like that.
So it works in both directions.

Likely it does. I don't know too much about you except I remember liking some of your comments.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, i don't accept your relgion and treat it as strange and move away like it is from magicians or something like that.
So it works in both directions.

Now again -- we all have reactions to things, don't we?

 

[ratiocinator]

What do you care about rational speculation? You aren't engaged in it.

I love rational speculation, just not made up magic supernatural beings.

The proposal is that whatever God is, God must by necessity transcend existence. The fact you can't understand how this could be so is not a flaw on the proposition. And the fact that you can't see why it's not a flaw in the proposition is your own shortcoming, not mine.

Feel free to explain it, then.

If 'God', as you sometimes seem to be saying, is nothing but the "mysterious reason why stuff exists" (if there is one), I'd just think it was an odd way to refer to it, but I've yet to find a theist who limits their belief in God to that, and almost all add things like 'purpose', 'plan', 'good', 'just' and so on, and endlessly tell us what it wants from us....

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Now again -- we all have reactions to things, don't we?

Yeah, but it ends in if everything is just beliefs or there is a part of the world that is not dependent on belief. And then even that might be to simple. But that is philosophy, which you don't like.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, i don't accept your relgion and treat it as strange and move away like it is from magicians or something like that.
So it works in both directions.

I'm still not sure what metaphysics means except that it's a philosophical term dealing with the beginnings of things, although I looked it up. What do you think it means?

 

[ratiocinator]

NO! For the third time, People making sense is axiomatic and life being conscious is theoretical.

This is just silly foot-stamping. No wonder nobody takes you seriously. "I'm right and you're wrong" is not a rational response.

If you simply close your mind to other perspectives you are stuck where you are.

I'm not, I'm waiting for you to provide some small hint of a reason why I should agree. You know, evidence, reasoning, that sort of thing.

So you believe that people will willing work against their best interests. You believe they will believe one thing and then do or say something entirely opposite. Everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant or confused. Everyone who disagrees with you or you perceive as disagreeing with you is spouting nonsense.

Straw manning people's position, doesn't help your cause or your credibility.

I use reality being as everyone perceives because otherwise you must consider everyone having a separate reality.

It's NOT how everybody perceives it. How many other people have you found who think everybody makes sense all the time and that all life is conscious? I've never knowing met anybody who perceives things like that before.

But you still don't need to accept my premises, just to know them so I can show that all experiment fits within this paradigm.

So you assert. What experiments?

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah, but it ends in if everything is just beliefs or there is a part of the world that is not dependent on belief. And then even that might be to simple. But that is philosophy, which you don't like.

I really don't so far get too involved with philosophical matters although I did sit through a lecture on campus by a famous philosopher (can't remember his name now) and thought 'what in the world is he talking about'? As you can probably guess I was into more technical things. Like music. and English grammar.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm still not sure what metaphysics means except that it's a philosophical term dealing with the beginnings of things, although I looked it up. What do you think it means?

Well, what is the world in objective terms as independent of the mind?

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, what is the world in objective terms as independent of the mind?

oopsy doopsy, you're asking a biiiiggg question. OK, I'll answer it in my simple enough terms. Although I don't think I fully understand your terms there. No, never mind, as I re-read your question I don't think I think the world can be explained independently of the mind. I hope that helps. even though I say it with a fairly quiet smile on my face.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

oopsy doopsy, you're asking a biiiiggg question. OK, I'll answer it in my simple enough terms. Although I don't think I fully understand your terms there. No, never mind, as I re-read your question I don't think I think the world can be explained independently of the mind. I hope that helps. even though I say it with a fairly quiet smile on my face.

Yeah, I agree. In a sense metaphysics makes no sense and should be avioded. But that is me speaking as a skeptic.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah, I agree. In a sense metaphysics makes no sense and should be avioded. But that is me speaking as a skeptic.

lol, how is that a skeptic? Perhaps it's called realistic...but maybe I'm wrong...in terms of thinking somehow the concept of figuring beginnings philosophically just doesn't hit the mark insofar as I am concerned when there is nothing to back up the concept except human conjecture based on mental understanding.
Here's one thing I think about -- there are (many) brains like Einstein and Hawking that are supposed to be very, very clever or something (another word perhaps). But meantime the oceans are polluted, people are going nuts killing one another without restraint (like bashing or killing someone on the street even if they don't know the person, etc.). And sometimes they think there IS a reason to kill others, like countries or groups getting even with one another. Yet there are people who use their thinking ability to try to figure how the world (life) began.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah, I agree. In a sense metaphysics makes no sense and should be avioded. But that is me speaking as a skeptic.

OK, later. Nice talking with you.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

lol, how is that a skeptic? Perhaps it's called realistic...but maybe I'm wrong...in terms of thinking somehow the concept of figuring beginnings philosophically just doesn't hit the mark insofar as I am concerned when there is nothing to back up the concept except human conjecture based on mental understanding.
Here's one thing I think about -- there are (many) brains like Einstein and Hawking that are supposed to be very, very clever or something (another word perhaps). But meantime the oceans are polluted, people are going nuts killing one another without restraint (like bashing or killing someone on the street even if they don't know the person, etc.). And sometimes they think there IS a reason to kill others, like countries or groups getting even with one another. Yet there are people who use their thinking ability to try to figure how the world (life) began.

Well, yes, you doubt, but not that you believe in. I doubt even that and makes me a skeptic.

 

[cladking]

So I am not like you and I am not like the believers in scientism.

Our beliefs are pretty similar but you seem to be more a pragmatist and I a dreamer.

 

[cladking]

So it's a philosophy dealing with (?) the first principles of things...?
When I heard the word metaphysics I would usually move back and not engage as if it were like from magicians or something like that. In other words, strange, not to be accepted.

Like many words there are many definitions and the definition of this word has changed a lot since my unabridged 1952 Funk and Wagnall's was published. The word is usually used now days to refer to magic and unknowables. But it still means "basis of science" whenever that definition is intended. More modern dictionaries call it "philosophical underpinnings of science" but the meaning of "philosophical" has "evolved" as well. "Basis of science" is only philosophical" in the sense that all things must be expressed in words to be communicated. I do not think of the "basis of science" as being philosophy but rather the holistic understanding of what makes science works and this includes definitions and axioms. Much of the discussion of this takes place among philosophers but each scientist needs to understand metaphysics in order to have a chance at the proper application of theory. Otherwise you get physicists who believe planes can't take off from conveyor belts

I make the sign of the cross and take a step back when the other definition is intended as well.

 

[PureX]

The ironies of science belief and trust in 19th century ideas is simply staggering. Rather than change theory they accept anomalies as routine.



"Metaphysics" is the definitions, axioms, and experiment that underlie all theory. Theory has no meaning except within this metaphysics so this means theory must be applied properly. Just as a computation of the gallons of gas your car will require to go from San Francisco to Honolulu is meaningless the "Theory of Evolution" is meaningless when applied to families or the Man on the Moon.

To help clarify, metaphysics refers to the axiomatic philosophical concepts that we are using to 'understand physics'. These might include the axiom that time only flows one way. That the universe is a finite entity And so on.

People who believe in scientism are improperly applying scientific theory and knowledge to all of reality. They color in all the unknowns and the unknowables with misapplied science. And then they reject all other means of knowing or reason. Their rejection of ancient knowledge and wisdom is a knee jerk reaction. Their rejection of those who don't share their beliefs is automatic.

This is quite correct and very well stated.