Believe in science & ethics
-
have you ever done meditation?Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:Yes, please elaborate. What is this wondrous "6th sense" that you speak so exultantly of?
You said in your previous posting that it is "awareness".....well, what kind of "awareness" are we talking about. Please elaborate, one liners do not contribute to this thread.
I did do a web search and all I got are just sites on Mr Shyamalan's ghost movie and some websites that promote pseudoscientific psychic beliefs....and if this is the "6th sense" that you talk about, then it is patently much much more unreliable (and indeed is plain supersitious folly) than the scientific method in studying natural phenomena.
If you do, then you may have some idea of what I am talking about.
If not, then there's nothing much else we can talk further, coz Fingolfin is right that I cannot prove it using Science
-
My apologies to call you a layman then, but yes you are right that 6th sense is not quantifiable. That's something that Science cannot explain now.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:I won't particularly consider myself layman, but that aside, the trouble is the "6th sense" is particularly unquantifiable, and thus it is not trusted within the realm of Science which bases itself upon evidence and not something particularly "unquantifiable". -
He who calls others stupid usually becomes the butt of all jokes as wellOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Only stupid people believe that science is 100% correct and only people that are more stupid believe that there is anything else more believable than scientific discoveries.
There's no stupid people in this world actually. Heck, even Gazelle is not stupid, just a bit myopic that's all -
No offense taken.Originally posted by soul_rage:My apologies to call you a layman then, but yes you are right that 6th sense is not quantifiable. That's something that Science cannot explain now.
-
Did you think I was referring to you?Originally posted by soul_rage:He who calls others stupid usually becomes the butt of all jokes as well
There's no stupid people in this world actually. Heck, even Gazelle is not stupid, just a bit myopic that's all
-
Thank you for validating my position. It is indeed good to hear you admit that science is "great".Originally posted by soul_rage:No, I din say Science was not great.
And I said before that I respect and agree that Science is the best tool to explain many things around us.
I ask you to explain/verify it. You didn't. Or perhaps refuse to or did not know what it is before mentioning it.Originally posted by soul_rage:Its not that you have no idea what the 6th sense is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
It is circular reasoning to claim that another refuse understanding of something that does not exist in the first place (except in the imagination)?
Meditation is simply a form of exercise that relaxes the mind (in some cases anyway....). It is not proven to have transcedental properties that can bring about greater awareness of explanation to physical phenomena.
By the same argument that you employ, I can also say:
Its not that you have no idea what Santa Claus is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
Its not that you have no idea what juju rays from space is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
Its not that you have no idea what universal psycho-energy, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
See how ridiculous above (italicised) lines of argument are...... -
Humans are like that, they want absolute certainty where there is none. They then go on to make the stupid mistake of assuming that since there are no absolute certainties, then it is free for all and people should be allowed to create their own unfounded / delusional rubbish.Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:Yup, I totally agree with you.
And as I said before, the scientific methodology is not 100% foolproof (becos it is a tool of "imperfect humans"), but it is still much better (and more trustworthy) than other methods of studying the world around us.
People like soul_rage love to slam science, but can they come up with a better alternative methodology in studying the natural world? Nope, science may not be 100% foolproof but it is definitely more reliable than other mental tools mankind can employ in understanding our universe. -
whether you refer to me or not is not importantOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Did you think I was referring to you?
Its how you view others. Calling others stupid is never a good thing to begin with.
Its more about your moral behavior that I am looking at. -
I can't, coz you believe in Science (and I would say without Science to validate it, you will never believe what I say)Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:I ask you to explain/verify it. You didn't. Or perhaps refuse to or did not know what it is before mentioning it.
It is circular reasoning to claim that another refuse understanding of something that does not exist in the first place (except in the imagination)?
By the same argument that you employ, I can also say:
Its not that you have no idea what Santa Claus is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
Its not that you have no idea what juju rays from space is, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
Its not that you have no idea what universal psycho-energy, its because you refuse to understand it because you cannot see, hear, touch, smell it.
See how ridiculous above (italicised) lines of argument are......
As I mentioned, you insist on proof on seeing, hearing, touching, smelling it, which is something that Science is based on, seeing, hearing, touching, smelling.
If you have tried meditation, then maybe we can discuss, but if you haven't, then there's no point in going on this, because
(1) you are not interested to know my opinion
(2) your true motive is just to demean or insult my opinion.
(3) without meditation, you won't know what I am talking about. -
and "who" are these others? Please name me a name, you?Originally posted by soul_rage:whether you refer to me or not is not important
Its how you view others. Calling others stupid is never a good thing to begin with.
Its more about your moral behavior that I am looking at.
You are symptomatic of the problem with unscientific people... you run with the assumptions in your head. You imagine and make wild inaccurate guesses and then criticize other people base on your wild imaginings.
-
And thanks for validating MY position, that Science is not 100% foolproof.Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:Thank you for validating my position. It is indeed good to hear you admit that science is "great".
You are behaving like many researchers, selective information or data. You refuse to admit data that is against what you are looking for (your objective).
You already have the end in mind when you started your postings, which is the very same behavior many researchers put to practice, when they conduct an experiment or research, due to commercial/practical/etc reasons. -
You can look at your other threads in Politics. Its easy for me to find threads in which you call others stupidOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:and "who" are these others? Please name me a name, you?
You are symptomatic of the problem with unscientific people... you run with the assumptions in your head. You imagine and make wild inaccurate guesses and then criticize other people base on your wild imaginings.
Again, selective data to accept into this thread?
I make wild inaccurate imaginations on you calling others stupid? Interesting. Many of us do not know what we truly did until someone points it out to us. Go to your threads in Politics, and you can see many real examples of what you posted -
Oh you mean that you are trying to talk outside of the context of this thread?Originally posted by soul_rage:You can look at your other threads in Politics. Its easy for me to find threads in which you call others stupid
Again, selective data to accept into this thread? If I call others stupid, I am alway careful to state why, that is, the context in which he is being stupid. For all I know, he could be brilliant in another context, but within the context that I called him stupid, he is!
Like here, now, don't you think that you are simply "stupid" for assuming that the post I made referred to you? Not that you are a stupid person in all contexts and all situations, but you certainly are stupid to assume that it refers to you and get all worked up about it. -
Like I said to you, whether you make this comment on anyone is secondary.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Oh you mean that you are trying to talk outside of the context of this thread? If I call others stupid, I am alway careful to state why, that is, the context in which he is being stupid. For all I know, he could be brilliant in another context, but within the context that I called him stupid, he is!
Like here, now, don't you think that you are simply "stupid" for assuming that the post I made referred to you? Not that you are a stupid person in all contexts and all situations, but you certainly are stupid to assume that it refers to you and get all worked up about it.
Even if you made this comment at Ibram Gaunt or any others, I would make the exact reply back to you.
Now you are justifying your actions of calling others stupid? Very interesting, your assumptions (not to mention your moral behavior) were all messed up at the beginning -
so according to you people are brilliant all the time and nobody makes any stupid mistakes and stupid errors in their lives and nobody should point out to people when they make stupid mistakes? Brilliant!Originally posted by soul_rage:Like I said to you, whether you make this comment on anyone is secondary.
Even if you made this comment at Ibram Gaunt or any others, I would make the exact reply back to you.
Now you are justifying your actions of calling others stupid? Very interesting, your assumptions (not to mention your moral behavior) were all messed up at the beginning
So you happy now since I called you Brilliant! ? -
In mathematics, you are saying ALL humans are like that. And all human make the SAME stupid mistake, and since you never mentioned it is specific to Science, therefore you are implying ALL humans are making the SAME stupid mistake in general.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Humans are like that, they want absolute certainty where there is none. They then go on to make the stupid mistake of assuming that since there are no absolute certainties, then it is free for all and people should be allowed to create their own unfounded / delusional rubbish. -
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
No. You are just jumping to conclusions.
so according to you people are brilliant all the time and nobody makes any stupid mistakes and stupid errors in their lives and nobody should point out to people when they make stupid mistakes? Brilliant!
So you happy now since I called you [b]Brilliant! ? [/b]
I just said no one is stupid. And if you study Mathematics, I imply that no one is stupid all the time, which is what you now trying to argue your previous statment into, after falling into a hole you dig for yourself -
So you agree that people are stupid some of the time? Brilliant! Happy?Originally posted by soul_rage:No. You are just jumping to conclusions.
I just said no one is stupid. And if you study Mathematics, I imply that no one is stupid all the time, which is one you are trying to argue yourself out of, after falling into a hole you dig for yourself -
read the previous posting on your own statement.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:So you agree that people are stupid some of the time? Brilliant! Happy?
You made a sweeping statement that all humans are stupid, and you have already discredited yourself
Anyway, this is out of topic. If you have nothing to offer but just sweeping statements, then just let me and Ibram continue the discussion.
I may disagree with him, but at least he offers valid arguments, as against your sweeping statements. -
Where? Where did I say all humans are stupid, all the time under all circumstances and situations? Your imagination is very active and you are brilliant, there I said it again, happy?Originally posted by soul_rage:read the previous posting on your own statement.
You made a sweeping statement that all humans are stupid, and you have already discredited yourself -
After making a sweeping statement, he now attempts to justify his reasons for calling others stupid, but bringing in last minute claims that he is not saying all humans are stupid all the time, blah blah.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Where? Where did I say all humans are stupid, all the time under all circumstances and situations? Your imagination is very active and you are brilliant, there I said it again, happy?
self-delusional. I rest my case -
Just some interesting questions to ask:
1) Do ghosts exist?
2) Are there really psychics?
3) What is there after death?
4) Why are we here?
5) Do you really believe in the Big Bang theory?
6) What will happen to the universe at the end?
7) Was Earth a mere random possibility that it became conducive for life?
This is not about religion or science. Just interesting questions to pose for interest. -
wah like that also can? I asked you to provide the proof where I said that all humans are stupid and you cannot produce the evidence and say rest your case.Originally posted by soul_rage:After making a sweeping statement, he now attempts to justify his reasons for calling others stupid, but bringing in last minute claims that he is not saying all humans are stupid all the time, blah blah.
self-delusional. I rest my case
Like that I can also say, "You are a pedophile." Since you do not need to produce the evidence, then you cannot expect me to produce the evidence also right? What a brilliant person you are! -
read the previous posts at 10.20am and 11.03am. You have already posted an example of how you say ALL humans are stupid. Though you did not use the word ALL, your statement is a sweeping statement, and in Mathematics, an implying statement is the same as an outright statement.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:wah like that also can? I asked you to provide the proof where I said that all humans are stupid and you cannot produce the evidence and say rest your case.
Like that I can also say, "You are a pedophile." Since you do not need to produce the evidence, then you cannot expect me to produce the evidence also right? What a brilliant person you are!
Don't be like Gazelle, so self-delusional.
Does Gollum sound familiar to you? -