Who here believes in "Scientism"?

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Cultures are only relevant to humans, and they are all of “human-construct” of how one live their lives, as individuals or as groups (eg communities) in some societies, who communicate & interact with each others with shared interests or some agreed standard behaviours, hence they followed some specific social norms that are relevance to those regions.

No one are denying that we have all some cultures, that maybe similar or different from each other - respectively “commonality” & “diversity“.

Why would you believe or accuse me of not having any understanding of the importance of culture or of cultural values?

You keep saying that I don’t understand culture, as you spin this strawman of yours about me.

And why would you deny humans are natural beings, born through natural reproduction, and each humans are made of flesh and bones, of tissues that are made of cells?

Is there a scientific reason why you pretend to believe that I deny that humans are a part of the natural world?

Because it strikes me as scientism, not science.

It's a cultural belief on your part, with no basis in science.

You mistake my doubt in my own existence with believing that the natural world does not include us.

You and I don't believe in the same things because we come from different cultures.

It's why we argue back and forth over the decades about stuff like gravity and string theory.

Bohemian Gravity - Choir of the Technical University of Vienna [with subtitle]​

The choir of the Technical University of Vienna is singing the classic song 'Bohemian Rhapsody' by Queen with special lyrics about the String Theory. With subtitle.

 

[cladking]

The fact that we have to 'believe' this or that simply underscored the fact that we do not know. Belief is, after all, the presumption of knowledge that we do not actually possess. And this lack of knowledge a frightening position to be in for a species that survives and thrives by knowing how to anticipate and manipulate it's environment to it's own advantage. Knowledge becomes our doorway to life and prosparity, while ignorance (unknowing) becomes a doorway to disaster. So the big question for humanity is how do we deal with that we do not know? How do we maintain control, or the illusion of control, in the face of all that unknowing?

It is from this predicament, and to address this question, that pretty much all human behavior results.

Yes!

We need to reinvent holistic science by any means at all. There are likely an infinite number of ways to do this but only a couple come to my mind.
But it's not going to happen unless either A.,= we learn an animal language and this is probably decades away, or B.,= rediscover Ancient Language ands ancient science which I believe could happen in weeks if we got Egyptology out of Egypt. There are other possible routes as well such as machine sentience but AI is distracting us from this discovery and it's well in the future as well.

Of course it could be thought out by philosophers and thinkers but I doubt there will be any work on this for some time.

I believe the clock is ticking and we have very limited time to do anything. We are being run by zealots who have no morals except greed and who have probably fooled even themselves into believing they know everything. They want lower populations so our extinction in a very real way has already begun.

 

[gnostic]

Is there a scientific reason why you pretend to believe that I deny that humans are a part of the natural world?

Seriously, you have understood a single thing thing I wrote.

of course, humans are part of natural world.

what you don’t seem to understand is the difference between natural and man-made.

Natural Sciences are studies of nature.

Nature as things about the Earth, its lithosphere (the crust, and the terrains, mountains, valleys, etc) and the interior of earth (mantle & core), the hydrosphere ( all the bodies of water, such as oceans, seas, lakes, rivers, and even ground water), and atmosphere. The sciences here are all referred to as Earth Sciences. Earth science also study geomagnetic fields, Earth’s axial rotation, its elliptical orbit around the Sun, and the alternating seasons that effect the regional climates.

There are also studies about things outside of Earth, such as space, planets, moons, asteroids, stars, galaxies, etc. Astronomy is the umbrella classification about space and the universe, and there are many fields of astronomy

Then there are studies of every living organisms (animals (including humans), plants, fungi, protists, bacteria and archaea), where the sciences involved here biology and all related biology fields (eg anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, etc). All biology related fields, fall under broad classification of Life Sciences.

Then there are even more fundamental sciences, chemistry (in terms of atoms, molecules, chemical reactions and so on) and physics which studying even smaller particles than atoms (eg particle physics, nuclear physics, quantum mechanics, etc), to something larger or more massive.

Yes, humans are part of the natural world, and we can their biology, like what we made of, how every body parts function.

But this human biology differs greatly from how humans behave, the various cultures people have in different things, and other activities that people do. These things fall under Social Sciences, the science of human behaviour (psychology, psychiatry, behavioural science, etc) and human societies (sociology, anthropology, linguistics, etc), social conducts (laws, ethic) and human activities (eg business study, economics, political science).

Social Sciences differ from Natural Sciences, because Natural Sciences only focused on nature, not made by humans, hence not human-constructs, man-made or artificial. Social Sciences are all about human social interactions, and less about biology.

There are other studies that are non-scientific that are of human-construct too, where it have more to do with human creativity that falls under the broad Humanities category.

Humanities include arts (eg drawing, painting , sculpture, photography, etc, most often referred to as visual arts) and crafts (eg pottery, knitting, etc), literature (eg epic poem, fiction, poetry, etc), languages (oral/spoken or written, translations, etc).

what I am saying here, and elsewhere, have nothing to do with Scientism.

That you would think so, only make you ignorant, because you’re not understanding what Scientism mean, nor where or when Scientism is being used.

Scientism is only used to describe people who believed that science (any science) has answers for EVERYTHING!

My descriptions of the Natural Sciences, Social Sciences & Humanities, is indication that I not being Scientism.

Every fields in each sciences, limited their scopes to studying only specific things, none of any of these fields are omniscient. Science has never been knowledge of everything, I have not seen anyone here claiming such stupid thing about scientism.

i just think you and others who keep using the nonsensical Scientism are excuses that you all did poorly in science, so you would attack anyone with some knowledge of science, by claiming Scientism. That’s just being ignorant & paranoid conspiracy theorists.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Seriously, you have understood a single thing thing I wrote.

of course, humans are part of natural world.

what you don’t seem to understand is the difference between natural and man-made.

Natural Sciences are studies of nature.

If I understand a single thing that you wrote, it is that humans and our artifacts are a part of nature, and that the artificial is a subclass of the natural, not disjoint from the natural.

Unless you don't view Beaver Dams, Bird Nests, and Spider Webs as part of the natural world, of course.

 

[gnostic]

If I understand a single thing that you wrote, it is that humans and our artifacts are a part of nature, and that the artificial is a subclass of the natural, not disjoint from the natural.

Wow. It amaze me that you continue to not understand what I mean by nature and natural.

Nature, as in what exist in nature and occur naturally, not man-made.

Yes, humans can use natural things as materials to make something...and I don't deny that.

Ok. Let me clarify what is natural and man-made, with an example.

A chair is an object that a person could make out of some pieces of wood. These wood indeed come from trees, hence natural. But nature cannot grow chairs.

A computer is even more complex, made of abundance of materials that come from nature, but nature cannot make computers.

So does that make sense, now?

Natural Sciences study nature.

Physical Sciences also study nature, but also anything that are physical but physical man-made, like in technology and engineering. Technology and engineering usually involved interdisciplinary of different sciences, hence more often not, the sciences used is usually referred to Applied Science.