-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is science based on circular reasoning?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
McBell
Unbound
make up your mind
gnostic
The Lost One
Thief is going to bring up his "spirit, first" or other variants like "spirit before substance".
That's his clumsy attempt at explaining cause-and-effect, not realising that he is actually using "circular reasoning" to justify his argument.
Thief think he being clever, but he's really quite the opposite.
Rogue theologian, my a##; he as dogmatic as they come.
I've sometimes seen nature defined as "that which is in some way or another apparent to us ultimately via our senses".
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I think you mean religion?
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
It is true of all religions that rely on scripture as the word of God.
Is that circular enough......
The earth is not actually round, but rather approximately spherical with uncountably many deformations, ergo science is not based on circular reasoning according to the above.
If circular reasoning allows me to write this post immediately visible by all people on earth, while not circular reasoning allows me only to pray to the vacuum, then give me more circular reasoning, please.
Ciao
- viole
Yes, but he didn't say scriptural religions that consider their text the word of their god to be followed as incontrovertible, he just said "religion." I agree that logic is circular, but saying that because a few religions regard their scripture as the incontrovertible word of their god to be followed doesn't mean all religions do that. It doesn't make sense.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
We are not nature??
If it is the "reality" then what is this "nature" or "natural" fundamentally?
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Look closely and you will see.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
No, WHAT is nature/natural. If I say everything is supernatural, you would want an answer, wouldn't you?Look around!
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Of course we are. You are external to me, and I'm to you, so by extension we're both part of nature to each other.
Because they're essentially the same. Without something that is assume to objectively exist outside of yourself and your mind, there's no world to be investigated. Maybe we can add one more assumption or premise to science: reality exist, objectively, and that's nature.
No. You'd just be defining natural as supernatural. If you proposed that supernatural causes which you defined were necessary for what we observe, then I'd ask why we should seek for such causes.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Supernatural would only be another form of natural.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
I think it certainly can be
Eddington referred to it as a scientific fishing net- designed to catch as much of the easiest fish as possible, and concluding that everything else doesn't exist
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
And your scientific evidence that science does not use circular reasoning?
Regards
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Thanks for your input.
In other words you don't have anything positive on the topic.
Regards