Is it debasing science?

[paarsurrey]

Science is beneficial in human activities in the physical and material realms. I always say that.
Is it debasing science?
Regards

____________
The thread was conceptualized from post #53 , in another sub-forum. One may like to read it for the context of this thread.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

Science is beneficial in human activities in the physical and material realms. I always say that.
Is it debasing science?
Regards

____________
The thread was conceptualized from post #53 , in another sub-forum. One may like to read it for the context of this thread.

Is what debasing science?

You need to indicate the proper noun you are addressing with the pronoun somewhere in your post in order to be coherent.

 

[LuisDantas]

Science is beneficial in human activities in the physical and material realms. I always say that.
Is it debasing science?

No, it is not. Science is basically a method of acquiring information and establishing how reliable it can be.

That said, I do have my doubts on how accurate is your understanding of science. Some of your threads strongly suggest that you attribute to it some unlikely qualities.

 

[Jumi]

Science is beneficial to humans, yes. That's why everyone uses the results of it, even if they are against it on religious or ideological grounds.

 

[Kemosloby]

Asking for proof or results is like suggesting they could be wrong. They don't like that as much as those who have full faith in the scientific community.

 

[David T]

No, it is not. Science is basically a method of acquiring information and establishing how reliable it can be.

That said, I do have my doubts on how accurate is your understanding of science. Some of your threads strongly suggest that you attribute to it some unlikely qualities.

Exactly like a seagull dropping clams on rocks.

 

[shunyadragon]

Science is beneficial in human activities in the physical and material realms. I always say that.
Is it debasing science?
Regards

____________
The thread was conceptualized from post #53 , in another sub-forum. One may like to read it for the context of this thread.

Science is neutral to how people use science, Yes, many members object to the way that you describe and consider the nature of science, and consider your view debasing science.

 

[paarsurrey]

Is what debasing science?

You need to indicate the proper noun you are addressing with the pronoun somewhere in your post in order to be coherent.

Did one read post #53 , in another sub-forum, referenced in the OP to understand the context. Please
Regards

 

[shunyadragon]

Did one read post #53 , in another sub-forum, referenced in the OP to understand the context. Please
Regards

Yes, I read post #53. It does not help your case, which is a consistent incoherent problem of comprehending science, and possibly a problem with English.

 

[Fool]

Science is beneficial in human activities in the physical and material realms. I always say that.
Is it debasing science?
Regards

____________
The thread was conceptualized from post #53 , in another sub-forum. One may like to read it for the context of this thread.

the word science itself means knowledge. there is subjective and objective knowledge. objective knowledge is often institutionalized and taught from a third person perspective; where as subjective knowledge is often gained from direct experience with someone or something.

unless you have direct experience with someone, or something, then you're speaking of something from a third person perspective.

its the difference between knowing how to driving a car and driving a car. One is not necessarily the same as the others. One requires a bit of belief and trust in the authority dispensing the information and the other is the author of knowing and the information.

some things can't be imparted from a third person perspective. like feelings, tastes, the aesthetics of something, or someone. institutionalized, or objective, science can show you the possible results but can't really explain why one person reacts to something positively and another negatively.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

Did one read post #53 , in another sub-forum, referenced in the OP to understand the context. Please
Regards

Yeah and your grammar is not very good.

I think your trying to say that humans using the discoveries of science debases the science which would not make any sense.

Science is a method not a collection of ideas.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yeah and your grammar is not very good.
I think your trying to say that humans using the discoveries of science debases the science which would not make any sense.
Science is a method not a collection of ideas.

English is not my mother tongue, sorry if I made any grammar mistake.
I hold that science is a boon from God for the humanity in the physical and material realms.
Is it debasing science?
Please make if there are any grammatical mistakes in the OP. I am an ordinary man in the street without any claim of being a scholar or a of piety, whatsoever.
Thanks and regards

 

[LuisDantas]

English is not my mother tongue, sorry if I made any grammar mistake.
I hold that science is a boon from God for the humanity in the physical and material realms.
Is it debasing science?

No. It does saddle science with an expectation of, shall we say, "unsuitability for other realms", but even that not a problem in and of itself.

That is definitely not debasing science.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

English is not my mother tongue, sorry if I made any grammar mistake.
I hold that science is a boon from God for the humanity in the physical and material realms.
Is it debasing science?
Please make if there are any grammatical mistakes in the OP. I am an ordinary man in the street without any claim of being a scholar or a of piety, whatsoever.
Thanks and regards

To clarify, your asking if an unbased assertion trumps a logical process?