Who hear thinks..........

[Secret Chief]

Yes or No answers only please.

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

Edit: Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?
Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath?

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

There could be a million of these but you get the picture.

What do you mean by "hear" ?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

Yes.

Edit: Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?
Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

No.

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath

Unsure.

 

[We Never Know]

Yes or No answers only please.

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

Yes

Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?

No. Its the best way to predict when it won't

Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

Yes

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath?

No. They don't 'help' us breathe. They are 'why' we breathe(try breathing without lungs).
Science can tell us how they work.

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

No. Just try it. You can figure that out without science.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That assumes that science and religion are contradictory and they are not.

True, but, then again, neither are pomegranates and Puccini. They do, however, represent (with a shout out to Stephen Jay Gould) non-overlapping magisteria.

 

[PureX]

Yes or No answers only please.

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

Edit: Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?
Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath?

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

There could be a million of these but you get the picture.

Yes. We get the picture. You really didn't want any actual answers.

 

[RestlessSoul]

What do you mean by "hear" ?

I thought this was going to be a thread about aural hallucinations

 

[JustGeorge]

My answers will be the opposite of @JustGeorge 's, just so I can annoy her.

Well, just to show you, I ain't answering.

 

[Quintessence]

No, on all counts, for two main reasons:

1. I don't do favorites as a general rule. Which means I also don't do "best" because that's more or less the same as picking favorites.
2. "Best" is a vague and ambiguous value judgement. There are different kinds of knowledge; best for what purpose? What are you trying to do or accomplish, exactly? If I'm going to make some vague and ambiguous value judgement I need to know the function or purpose of the assessment because that dramatically changes the answer.
   
   • Of particular relevance is the fact that scientific research takes a tremendous amount of time to execute. If I'm drowning in a lake I'm not exactly going to care about using science as the so-called "best" way to understand why I'm drowning. I'm going to use my actual real life experiences to go "oh no, I'm drowning, get out of the water" like all of our ancestors who didn't die did.

Also in the title - "here" not "hear." That's just bugging me.

 

[Secret Chief]

Well, just to show you, I ain't answering.

Damn.

 

[dybmh]

Yes or No answers only please.

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

Yes

Edit: Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?

Yes

Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

Yes

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath?

Yes

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

Yes

There could be a million of these but you get the picture.

No. Now I'm sad.

 

[dybmh]

Experience is the best way to know humans cannot walk on water. I attempt to walk on water,

The problem with your reasoning, not just here but in one of the other answers as well, is,

You could be an outlier. Science is the BEST way to determine whether or not that is the case via statistical analysis.

 

[SalixIncendium]

That assumes that science and religion are contradictory...

How?

 

[Vinayaka]

I avoid thinking whenever possible.

I don't understand.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The problem with your reasoning, not just here but in one of the other answers as well, is,

You could be an outlier. Science is the BEST way to determine whether or not that is the case via statistical analysis.

I stand corrected. The next time I step onto water, I'll wait to sink until I've formulated a statistical analysis.

 

[Quintessence]

You could be an outlier. Science is the BEST way to determine whether or not that is the case via statistical analysis.

Yeah, this is why I ask about specifics. Doing exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis for something that's pretty darned obviously the case through basic life experience is a waste of time for most humans. That makes it firmly suboptimal (aka, not the best) unless you specifically want exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis.

 

[HonestJoe]

There could be a million of these but you get the picture.

I see the point you're trying to make and I kind of agree with the broad concept, but I don't think you've done a good job demonstrating it, certainly not if you're seeking to convince anyone who thinks differently.

 

[anotherneil]

Yes or No answers only please.

ok (oops)

Science is the BEST way to know water is made from H2O?

yes

Edit: Science is the BEST way to know the sun will come up tomorrow?

yes

Science is the BEST way to know the Earth rotates around the sun?

This cannot be answered with a "yes" or "no" - it's undefined (no frame of reference was specified).

Furthermore, your previous question may have set a precedent in establishing a frame of reference, by default - that of observations from Earthlings (as in us), and that default frame of reference would be a stationary Earth; in a stationary Earth model, Earth isn't rotating around the sun or anything else.

In a stationary Earth frame of reference model, the sun rotates around Earth.

Science is the BEST way to know our lungs help us beath?

yes

Science is the BEST way to know humans cannot walk on water?

yes

There could be a million of these but you get the picture.

yes

 

[dybmh]

Yeah, this is why I ask about specifics. Doing exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis for something that's pretty darned obviously the case through basic life experience is a waste of time for most humans. That makes it firmly suboptimal (aka, not the best) unless you specifically want exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis.

My reply is to Salix who in previous conversations has denied the independent existence of any one or any thing beyond his own mind. Because of this, when Salix answered "I would test it", that does not include any others. It is only his mind testing, and only his mind observing the results of the test. I think it's important to point this out when interpreting Salix's answers. It would be wrong to understand it from the point of view of anyone other than Salix. That point of view has significant limitations which need to be applied.

What you're suggesting as "pretty darn obvious" would include more than 1 independent individual in agreement on the phenomena, right?

Also: the questions asked for the best way to "know". Pretty darn obvious is an "educated-guess".

Educated Guess =/= knowing
Statistical-analysis =/= knowing

Because the confidence of knowing from statistical analysis is much greater than the confidence from an educated-guess, statistical-analysis is better.

 

[Madsaac]

Well, observation generally is the best way to learn stuff.
I see science more as a way to validate what we think we know.

You observe something, create a theory of how it works, then you can use the concepts of science to test your theory out.
Or not. As long as whatever you believe to be true keeps working as expected, no real need to test it.

However if you start to find that many of your theories don't always work out as you expect, you might want to start testing them more often to regain confidence in them. That is where science comes in.

Just for arguments sake lets say that observation is part of the scientific process, which it is, the what do you think?

I find it surprising that people just won't say that without science we wouldn't know what H2O is, or how our lungs work, or knowledge of the solar system and that we can't walk on water, especially if I couldn't try it myself.

 

[Madsaac]

Yeah, this is why I ask about specifics. Doing exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis for something that's pretty darned obviously the case through basic life experience is a waste of time for most humans. That makes it firmly suboptimal (aka, not the best) unless you specifically want exhaustive methodological observation and statistical analysis.

It wasn't obvious to people hundreds of years a go and so people believed in the supernatural for explanations

But many now believe science is the best way to answer these questions, however some people try and confuse the notion without any logical reasoning. For example, type of language used, or a subjective perspective, or the type of knowing

It's obvious we wouldn't know what water is made from without science, or the rotation of the Earth and so on.