The Problem with Science

[ThePainefulTruth]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

 

[Sunstone]

Your OP seems mere rhetoric, scarcely making a point, let alone an intelligible argument in favor of a point. Shouldn't this be posted in the Random Meaningless Messages thread?

 

[james blunt]

Your OP seems mere rhetoric, scarcely making a point, let alone an intelligible argument in favor of a point. Shouldn't this be posted in the Random Meaningless Messages thread?

That is a good science post by the opp, it is in the right section sir. It has huge meaning and is an interesting question.

 

[james blunt]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

When science got lost , they did not understand the word govern. To govern is to cleverly organise and not to rule.

People might not like this, Hitler had some good values but went about it the wrong way.

National socialism is a need and a must , but not the way Hitler tried it. Not exact either to his beliefs.


All our prime ministers and presidents, should be like knights around the round table, Arthur had it right. But Arthur has to be a good man or woman or the table has not altered.

Me personally does not have enemies, I walk up to my ''enemy'' and give them a cuddle and say ''are we cool''.
I won't let anybody be my enemy .


Welcome to the farm yard.

We all need go a walk over to Syria , they will soon stop when science arrives. They will chit themselves if all science went.

Bashar Hafez al-Assad anyone got his phone number I will give him a call see what the hell he is doing.


Dear Mr Bashar,
I have no alternative but to declare you being the Devil/Satan unless you stop what you are doing. Anyone who protects you is Satan's slaves. You have this final warning or my angels are coming to send you back to hell. There will be no mercy from me, the entirety of the blame is on you and you as the Devil are objectively my real and only enemy. I objectively have the right to fight the Devil.


Yours sincerely

God

 

[Twilight Hue]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

Name anything subjective without an objective basis by which it rests and you might have an argument worthy of debate.

 

[james blunt]

Name anything subjective without an objective basis by which it rests and you might have an argument worthy of debate.

Your sentence, subjective and objective is not absolute. Only absolute is TRUE objective, if it's not absolute, then it was not objective to begin with. It was subjective.

 

[james blunt]

My Assad does not realise he can go from zero to hero , he can stop this and become his peoples hero by simply stopping and asking the people what they want.

He can then put some of these people around his round table, then he has both sides of the table joined.

He can make that country a good wealthy country. ''he'' can sit around the worlds round table and have an equal say. It is hardly rocket science, somebody just needs to make him see sense that he is being the Devil.

The worlds round table is about gravity, it has to be critical balanced before it will work in harmony.

1 leader and 1 civilian is a balance on a table

2 leaders and 2 civilians is a balance on a table

3 leaders and 0 civilians is just not balanced even if they had four.


A+B=1

Because A = 0.5 and B=0.5 and that is life and everything.


A man and a women A+B , an atom A+B, a spacial field A+B , an agreement A+B


Now when God says you are upsetting him, ''he'' is upset why he commands. Dark energy is not worth a war when the sun gives us all the energy we need, things might slow down, but slowing down is not a bad thing, the world moves too fast.

I know because I am, I am crying for the world.

The prophecy will be changed, one man will not rule the world and destroy it by ordering a single nuclear strike that starts world war 3. I will remain amongst people, unknown and walking amongst them unseen . I will remain poor and true to myself , because then I save the world.

Do not listen to me because I am a fraud and a fake, I know nothing, always know nothing, I am a ''troll''.


Please ban me, it hurts ''him'' to think like this.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

It is most unfortunate that those fools at NASA, CERN, and Silicon Valley have never had enough wisdom to listen to such impeccable criticism of science from random self-appointed experts on the Internet. Perhaps one day they will wise up and see the error of their ways.

 

[shunyadragon]

The main problem is the followers of ancient religions consider their scripture, often 2000 years old and older, as the standard of interpreting science. This is an unfortunate emotional attachment based ones dependence on a church or religious belief sense of community.

The principle of the Harmony of Science and religion of the Baha'i Faith is the best guidance for Theists to make a break with past attachments. The belief that considers science to be the interpreter of the nature of our physical existence and the evolving progressive nature of scientific knowledge must be accepted in priority over scripture and scripture understood in terms of the evolving nature of scientific knowledge. In the Baha'i view the evolving knowledge of science is a form of Revelation.

The atheist and/or agnostics have made the break, and can easily accept science as science.

 

[exchemist]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

What is "Truth" (with a capital T), please? It is a concept I have not found to be used anywhere in science.

Nor do I recognise the implied division of people into objective and subjective types. One reason why science insists on reproducible observations is because of the subjectivity, bias and impurity of motives that are inherent in human beings. This is nothing to do with "double standards, "corruption" or "evil", so far as I can see, just normal human weakness.

I do not buy your Manichaean depiction of the world.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

I guess it is up to each individual as to how they deal with the human culture and society they find themselves in. If they disagree with how society is run they can protest and band with others to change their society. Barring that, they can move to another society that better fits their views. As history and modern history have shown us, politics and science do not always align.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Your OP seems mere rhetoric, scarcely making a point, let alone an intelligible argument in favor of a point. Shouldn't this be posted in the Random Meaningless Messages thread?

Your point is well taken. I know it's kinda gray, but I think there's a kernel there, and given the response, might as just go with it.

When science got lost , they did not understand the word govern. To govern is to cleverly organise and not to rule.

People might not like this, Hitler had some good values but went about it the wrong way.

National socialism is a need and a must , but not the way Hitler tried it. Not exact either to his beliefs.

Applying science, i.e. reason, to government, renders it to be a constitutional republic with a capitalist economic system, and citizens educated by anything other than government schools.

All our prime ministers and presidents, should be like knights around the round table, Arthur had it right. But Arthur has to be a good man or woman or the table has not altered.

Your medieval romantic vision is just another form of elitist (read double standard) governance. We need to chase reality instead of fantasies.

Name anything subjective without an objective basis by which it rests and you might have an argument worthy of debate.

Art.

Please ban me, it hurts ''him'' to think like this.

Everyone has the right to oblivion.

It is most unfortunate that those fools at NASA, CERN, and Silicon Valley have never had enough wisdom to listen to such impeccable criticism of science from random self-appointed experts on the Internet. Perhaps one day they will wise up and see the error of their ways.

I can't fault their science, but they have gravitated to socialism. But there are example of corrupt science and always have been, from the terracentric universe to man made global warming.

The main problem is the followers of ancient religions consider their scripture, often 2000 years old and older, as the standard of interpreting science. This is an unfortunate emotional attachment based ones dependence on a church or religious belief sense of community.

Yes, but that's criticism of religion, not science.

In the Baha'i view the evolving knowledge of science is a form of Revelation.

That's a good way to look at it I suppose, another way of calling it natural revelation, but revelation implies a revealer, and free will can not be sustained by even that degree of intervention.

The atheist and/or agnostics have made the break, and can easily accept science as science.

As I've often said, the only reasonable positions on God are agnostic-atheism and agnostic-deism.

What is "Truth" (with a capital T), please? It is a concept I have not found to be used anywhere in science.

Truth is God, wherever that leads. Its aspects are knowledge, justice, love and beauty--from pure objective to pure subjective.

Nor do I recognise the implied division of people into objective and subjective types.

I don't either, we're all both.

One reason why science insists on reproducible observations is because of the subjectivity, bias and impurity of motives that are inherent in human beings. This is nothing to do with "double standards, "corruption" or "evil", so far as I can see, just normal human weakness.

I agreee.

[quoteI do not buy your Manichaean depiction of the world.[/QUOTE]
(I had to look that one ups)--"a believer in a syncretistic religious dualism (see dualism 3) originating in Persia in the third century a.d."

That goes about it all wrong, you don't combine religions to come up with a religion, you take the facts as far as you can, and then add reasonable speculation on which we can debate.

 

[WalterTrull]

Name anything subjective without an objective basis

Actually, name anything objective without a subjective basis. OK, OK, I'm just playing with words. There are no objects, just images which are totally subjective. That's on page 43 of the manual. Didn't you read it?

 

[james blunt]

Applying science, i.e. reason, to government, renders it to be a constitutional republic with a capitalist economic system, and citizens educated by anything other than government schools.




Your medieval romantic vision is just another form of elitist (read double standard) governance. We need to chase reality instead of fantasies.

Firstly how is my version elitist? If the poor and the rich sit at the round table that is objectively equality in decisions.

An elitist governance is thinking the clever, well educated , well off , could be any wiser than a poor man.


Your ideas are of cognitive control without considering equality.

 

[dfnj]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

All "good" objectivity is determined by a subjective judgment.

 

[james blunt]

All "good" objectivity is determined by a subjective judgment.

No its not, it is determined by an absolute judgement.

 

[dfnj]

No its not, it is determined by an absolute judgement.

I do not agree with your opinion. Prove it is absolute. Why is "junk science" called "junk" ?

 

[Nakosis]

Science is discipline at the universally objective end of the Truth spectrum called knowledge. But in a free society, anyone who lives in a religious or otherwise subjective world, can waltz into a scientific endeavor and start branding everything from Truth to toilet paper with subjective qualities, and even claim what they're doing is objective and universally true for everyone.

The problem with science is that it is just a tool. Anyone can use it to validate the knowledge they think they know. A person can use it rightly or wrongly. They can use it with their biases and prejudices or without. Relying on someone else's claim of proper use of science is not science.

So how does a person seeking knowledge deal with this. Yeah, ignore them as best we can, but what happens when they start, through political correctness or brute force, to be come professors, politicians, judges and police officers? The war between good an evil always starts out as struggle for Truth starting with outright lies a twisting the definitions of words to enable the unknowledgeable (in modern parlance, political correctness) to establish and maintain a double standard.

The struggle for Truth starts with lies. The main one IMO that a person needs to struggle for it. Truth is all around you, waiting to be accepted. The only struggle I suppose is in letting go of all the lies you wanted to be true. instead of what actually is the Truth.

There is no silver bullet. But understanding what's going on, that a double standard is always at the bottom of all corruption/evil, is as close as we're ever gonna come to having one. So, bottom line, it isn't just a problem with science (though it's somewhat easier to expose there, thus the title here), but also with justice, love and even art, as well.

Justice, love, art... even corruption and evil, are feelings. What you feel is what you feel. that's the truth about who you are. The problem comes, IMO, when we try to justify our feelings. Trying to use science to justify our feelings, that's not really the proper use of science. You already know your feelings, you feel them. It's not really necessary to justify them or validate them.

 

[james blunt]

I do not agree with your opinion. Prove it is absolute. Why is "junk science" called "junk" ?

If it is possible it is not junk, but if something is far superior and more logical than that something, then that possible just becomes junk.
Absolute answers account for all existences in any dimension of time, even if we were simulation beings, absolute applies to the creators also.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Applying science, i.e. reason, to government, renders it to be a constitutional republic with a capitalist economic system, and citizens educated by anything other than government schools.

I am wondering how you are using science in this example? What is your hypothesis? What is the null hypothesis? What data are you using? How is it objective?

I can't fault their science, but they have gravitated to socialism. But there are example of corrupt science and always have been, from the terracentric universe to man made global warming.

How is the current scientific consensus amongst climatologists on global warming "corrupt"?