I've been seeing many people on this board who seem to be against the idea of science, logic, and reason. Can I ask how the thought that logic is close-minded, moronic, "you-name-it" was obtained without the use of logic in the first place?
Printable View
I've been seeing many people on this board who seem to be against the idea of science, logic, and reason. Can I ask how the thought that logic is close-minded, moronic, "you-name-it" was obtained without the use of logic in the first place?
I haven't dug too deeply into the topics against logic but I'm assuming they hail from the same direction as topics about perception and this whole "non-duality" that is being discussed all over the board.
But, aye, so as to not make false assumptions, I'll just join the above question and wait for an answer.
Science and logic, are just relative inferences into personal experience and attempted interpretation of another.
Theology is everything that we do not experience, but that we claim to 'know'.
Science, is based on theology.
Theology, is based on inference.
Inference, is based on belief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClouD
Oh hai there BS.
How is science based on theology? An example of theology is a man feeling happy and believing a talking rabbit named Garathoudus made him happy, no logic needed. While an example of science, is when one person sees pushing a button turns a light on, and another person sees pushing a button turns a light on, so they then conclude pushing that button turns the light on, obviously, logic is very much needed. There could be another reason for the light turning on, but after a number of tests constantly being conclusive, narrowing down the odds of it being Garathoudus, the talking rabbit, turning on the light, it can be generally decided that pushing the button will turn the light on.
We can never be certain of the EXACTS of something, but we can do our best to narrow it down with science. After it gets narrowed down, unless something shows us our belief on the idea needs to be widened again, we have no reason to re-widen it.
How are you finding the keys to type your posts? How are you turning on your computer to come to the website? How are you getting electricity to power your computer? All with logic. If you sat wondering if the computer is really getting electricity from the power outlet or from Thor, God of Thunder, you'd never get anything done.
Do something today without logic, like trying to eat without putting food in your mouth, or try to turn a light on without flicking the switch and see what happens. If you didn't use any logic at all, you'd probably be a vegetable.
Theology is everything that we do not experience, but that we claim to 'know'.
I meant in that context :)
You are right, we cannot be certain of facts of everything.
Yet, the logic that 'founded' science, is what perpetuates it.
Inference, that is.
We can never know anything, if we cannot theorise that 1+1=2.
Your point is real, but I think you're making it a little more dramatic then it really is. You cannot deny that we must be close to truth with how efficiently we complete tasks, such as using a computer or healing broken bones. Even if we are slightly off on the exact reasons for our success, it would be a mistake to say we know nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClouD
Just no.
"Theology is a term first used by Plato in The Republic (book ii, chap 18). The the term is a compounded from two Greek words theos (god) and logos (rational utterance). It has been defined as reasoned discourse about God"
no way cloud !
science is based on experiments!
experiment - the work, job, hobbie.
This called experience... Now scientist is experienced in that part of things...
P.S. Ethereal_Apprentice im way for the logic and experience, experiments, and science..
"Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method."
Science = Logic + Observation, just as Ethereal stated above.
A belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise (argument) to be true without necessarily being able to adequately prove their main contention to other people who may or may not agree. (Wikipedia!)
(s) Theology is based on beliefs.
(s) Science = Logic + Observation.
Belief is defined above.
Theology is based on beliefs.
Therefore, Theology is held to be true without proof.
Belief is defined above.
Science = Logic + Observation
There is no belief in Science -- only logic and observation.
Therefore, Science is not held to be true without proof.
Theology is held to be true without proof and Science is not held to be true without proof.
Therefore, Theology and Science can not be related.
Lets take a look at logic from the dream side of things. I know it's foiled many a lucid dream for me. When things start getting weird, I'll just come up with a rational explanation for it, rather than realize the truth, that it is just a dream.
Logic is not always a good thing, and it can at times cloud the truth in RL much like in a dream.
Logic IS always a good thing and your evidence to the contrary makes no sense. Your dream self is generally illogical to the fact that the dream world isn't real. To get a lucid dream, one must use logic to realize one is dreaming. Please think about your arguements before you post them.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
heh.. yep.. i agree with b12 who explained wider than i did... but b12 didnt wrote anything about experiments.. but its ok.. :)
hint - logic and experience is always in tune..
Logic is not absolute. Have you never seen seen Star Trek? Damn arrogant Vulcans!
Logic arises as a result of what you already know. Unless you know everything, then your logic will always be flawed, and very limited. It can hold you back at times.
I already admitted that logic can be flawed, but it is never a bad thing to have. It is making the very best of what you are given. Without logic, there is not another system to explore the world except blind ignorance. No one in this forum follows the practice of blind ignorance, and if they say they do they're a liar because they're able to find the keys to type out their post. They find it because they practice logical thought.
Logic leading you astray is called a mistake, and humans will make them all the time. Without logic, you will make so many more mistakes that it is not worth forsaking logic to avoid the few mistakes that come with logic.
Logic arises as a result of what you already know. - the cusp
so true because logic goes same way as experience..
but belief stops you..it never leads you anywhere...
btw what is PK and RV ethereal_apperntice
Are you expecting a logical answer to this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethereal_Apprentice
i think that means psychokinesis (which i believe is a synonym for telekinesis) and remote viewingQuote:
Originally Posted by roguext22
oh, and my 2 cents in this thread: I've seen waay more scientific discussions on this forum than those "psychic friend" "paranormal conspiracy" "learn PK in one year or your money back (not)" types of sites
I definatly follow logic and science, but also would like to experiment with pk and what not to see if it could work. If indeed I ever find it to work, then I would try to apply science to it.
As far as anti-logic threads, I mainly only see those in the philosophy forum, and philosophy I find pretty illogical a lot of the time, so I think most people here are not anti-logic, they just want to stay open
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark75
If you care to show me something without using logic, be my most honored guest.
(PK stands for psychokinesis which is something like telekinesis, but a little broader, and RV stands for remote viewing.)
Banana hammock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethereal_Apprentice
:bowdown::banana:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatterbrain
;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatterbrain
I am a skeptic. Of theology and beliefs, as well as statements based on science. I want to see the science, to see the studies, the experiments. Because bad science (done according to faulty methods) can say some pretty crazy things. When someone makes a statement based upon science I want refrences to back it up. I want to look for myself whether it is based on reasonably good science or bad science.Quote:
Originally Posted by b12
I love science, logic and truth. However, I also recognize that there are things that are hard to explain with logic and science alone. I take a middle path. Science is valid, and so can be theology.