why such huge veneration of science?

Post Reply New Topic

Aghogday I am not criticising you I am simply stating that I cannot cope with all the capitalisation. It does not matter what the reason for doing it is nor the person using the technique. I am not alone in this as you are aware.

Ok after reading the first line I have to say you are very wrong in your characterisation. Again anyone who understands the SM would never use the word "truth" . Most would say something like "the knowledge garnered is to date our best approximation"

You were before in suggesting a falsehood for something that was not even said in the comment I affirmed, so I more than adequately defended it, and that is all.

In the next comment I adequately clarified and validated my method of communication that nah, is not always pleasing to all, but many have told me directly that it is extremely effective, as well.

I am neither a fool or ignorant, per your view of life, and trust me when you bite me I will bite back, using wit, as I always have here. :)

And nah, once AGAIN, I didn't make the definition of science up, Dictionary dot com just relays it to ya.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science

Well whoever wrote those definitions does not understand the nature of the Method. If they did they would realise that "facts" have no place in a system which by a matter of deliberate design constantly questions and attempts to disprove findings. So you stick with your definitions I will stick with the actual practicalities of the SM.

So now you are smarter than dictionary dot com.

So much for research.

And you are starting to amuse me, and I thank you for that, as I always enjoy a smile.

We're getting a wonderful example of the impotence of nonscience here.

For example: "the only fact is that there are no facts..." Therefore, my ideology is "true" because anything that disagrees with it is not "fact".

That's circular reasoning taken to a whole new level of absurdity.

I put more faith in a belief system that is both self-correcting and falsifiable than in any belief system that is dogmatic and unprovable. Therefore, I believe in Science and revile religion.

Yes, Fnord, you get my point exactly.
If I use the phrase "heathen" the whole argument looks hateful, tribal, and archaic.
Now-a-days religious persons use the term "scientist" but they really mean "heathen."

The biggest thing wrong with religion is: Guilt
The second worst thing about religion is: Torturing
The third worst thing about religion is: Murdering
The fourth worst thing about religion is: Censorship
The fifth worst thing about religion is: Enslavement
The sixth worst thing about religion is: Suppression
The seventh worst thing about religion is: Theft
The eighth worst thing about religion is: Betrayal
The ninth worst thing about religion is: Lying
The tenth worst thing about religion is: Hypocrisy

By IS, I mean NOW, not years a-gone I mean NOW.
I don't mean 1%, I mean 92%

but at least they brought us language....

That is really cool.
You should make some long youtube videos of this.
People could use them with headphones in order to fall asleep, and/or to acquire more knowledge.

I have to say that I have always really loved the scientific method, and it's one of the few things that I feel I can have faith in.
However, I do agree with the original poster's original post.
Science may have been the last stand for significant schemas that hadn't yet been co-opted by the by the hive mind, but that's no longer true, and quite upsetting for me.

As for what was wrong with science before that point, I think Carl Jung described that very well in his book about the meaning of dreams. I will not repeat it all here, but he analytically describes how science has systematically destroyed the individual human conscious in favor of the collective.

So far science has only a partial handle on a relatively small percentage of existence, and so I think the major damage has been done to the individual existence by way of science's denial or rejection of all that it does not have a handle on, in particular spiritual matters, that Jung considered archetypal to human consciousness.

In this way, the mechanisms of science were supportive of government control and diametrically opposed to most religions. Jung formed these thoughts at a time having recently seen the destructive power of governments far outpace that of even the co-opted organized religions.

That's a great description of many present organized religions, and also many governments, because both are co-opted agents of the hive mind with the goal to separate/divide people.

Thanks Janissy, I didn't know this had a name -I was just so tired of 'arguing' on the side of reason against ... what? I don't even know... somehow the panicked breast clenching to religious dogma is heavily welded to the animal survival instinct. How else can someone loose themselves in such mindless passion(?) unless it deeply involves some of the most basic animalistic drives?

Until christians can be made to feel safe none of the rest of us ever will be.

Well it was pretty hard to do with you using all that logic and such.
Being completely unreasonable is hard work!! =(
Kudos to religion-ians for doing it so thoroughly and continuously!

LOL
Stop with all the logic!!

At least you can put those little squiggly things over the e's. That's pretty kewl. I dunno how to do that.

I don't understand this part. Will you explain it again/differently?

Science doesn't nuke people, people nuke people.

hehe sorry I couldn't resist... =)