Why don't some people like being created?

[The Voice of Reason]

Just deal with the question of how and why intuition is a better method of determing fact and fiction than the scientific method is.

You might as well have asked your dog to explain the workings of the internal combustion engine.

 

[Autodidact]

Its not the scientific method that is in and of itself that is bad. It is it's usage.Einstein was led by intuition and used the scientific method to determine what was true or not but he always stepped out in intuition into great discoveries and paved the way for the rest.As did Tesla .
Share with me who you think the greatest scientist of today is?
Actually to think about it, Einstein is a great example of how intuition comes leads into greater awareness of reality and answers this question.

INTUITION IN-DEPTH: EINSTEIN'S INTUITION

How ironic you bring him up with such a question.

So, about the scientific method (4th time I've asked?). In your view, does it work? Is it a good way to learn about the natural world?

 

[Walkntune]

[QUOTEscientific method is the best known method for establishing fact from fiction.][/QUOTE]

The scientific method is only good for determining that which is logical. It is not the best method for determining reality because reality is more than logical and so anyone relying only on the scientific method is not experiencing all of reality.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Escientific method is the best known method for establishing fact from fiction.

The scientific method is only good for determining that which is logical. It is not the best method for determining reality because reality is more than logical and so anyone relying only on the scientific method is not experiencing all of reality.

Well, you are correct on one thing.

The scientific method does not work for establishing metaphysical psudoscientific nonsense.

 

[Autodidact]

So say for example you want to figure out whether the sun revolves around the earth, or vice versa. What is the best method to use to figure that out?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The scientific method is only good for determining that which is logical. It is not the best method for determining reality because reality is more than logical and so anyone relying only on the scientific method is not experiencing all of reality.

Can you name any instance in the entirety of human history when a sufficient and well-defined answer to something was not deduced through logic?

Not that this has anything to do with what I asked. How hard is it for you to just answer my question?

 

[Walkntune]

Can you name any instance in the entirety of human history when a sufficient and well-defined answer to something was not deduced through logic?

Not that this has anything to do with what I asked. How hard is it for you to just answer my question?

I don't use logic to determine whether the sky is beautiful!

 

[Walkntune]

So, about the scientific method (4th time I've asked?). In your view, does it work? Is it a good way to learn about the natural world?

How many dimensions are there in our natural world? Oh I forgot this may be a scientific debate here.
We can logically see into the four dimensions which is very surface of reality but people with depth in there perception are seeing into some others that I believe logic has not arrived at YET!

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Well, you are correct on one thing.

The scientific method does not work for establishing metaphysical psudoscientific nonsense.

Or, as The Alan Parsons Project called it - Psychobabble:
[youtube]i7RbZNT5A2A[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7RbZNT5A2A

 

[The Voice of Reason]

...I won't stand on a bunch of math formulas that may or may not line up with true reality!

and

We can logically see into the four dimensions which is very surface of reality but people with depth in there perception are seeing into some others that I believe logic has not arrived at YET!

Sagacious, in a C.S. Lewis sort of way ...

I think I'll go to the bathroom now, and get down the bottle of Syrup of Ipecac.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How many dimensions are there in our natural world? Oh I forgot this may be a scientific debate here.
We can logically see into the four dimensions which is very surface of reality but people with depth in there perception are seeing into some others that I believe logic has not arrived at YET!

Great.

However, if logic "has not arrived" at these invisible dimensions yet, then there's no way that anything in them could be known to you, is there?

 

[Walkntune]

Great.

However, if logic "has not arrived" at these invisible dimensions yet, then there's no way that anything in them could be known to you, is there?

Logic only sees that which is on the surface and logical!If you don't see in depth and past the surface then I I don't know what to say? You have to determine that yourself.

 

[Autodidact]

How many dimensions are there in our natural world? Oh I forgot this may be a scientific debate here.
We can logically see into the four dimensions which is very surface of reality but people with depth in there perception are seeing into some others that I believe logic has not arrived at YET!

Y'know what, I'm really tired of asking the same questions over and over only to get your evasion. Evasion is a symptom of dishonesty, to answer your previous question. Oh, and btw, woo-woo. It's a simple yes or no question. If I want to learn something about the natural world, such as how old the earth is, how many planets there are, or whether capsicum is an effective treatment for cancer, in your opinion, is the scientific method the best way to do that?

If not, what is?

 

[Autodidact]

I don't use logic to determine whether the sky is beautiful!

Hello, facts? This thread is not about aesthetics, it's about facts.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Logic only sees that which is on the surface and logical!If you don't see in depth and past the surface then I I don't know what to say? You have to determine that yourself.

From Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass:
The Red Queen: Sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't use logic to determine whether the sky is beautiful!

What does that have to do with determining what is fact and what is fiction?? You're not even trying to answer my question at all, are you?

I give up. You obviously have no idea what you're on about.

 

[McBell]

You obviously have no idea what you're on about.

I disagree.
I think he is backed up against the fence and does not want to further damage his position by actually answering the question.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Because mine has a talking snake and a magical garden.

:biglaugh:......elements like these can be found in other myths as well....Thank you though. I needed that little chuckle.....

Hey, welcome to RF.....: hamster :

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I disagree.
I think he is backed up against the fence and does not want to further damage his position by actually answering the question.

Probably a fairer assessment, but I'm still fed up with him.

 

[Dware]

I disagree.
I think he is backed up against the fence and does not want to further damage his position by actually answering the question.

Im you're Huckleberry..