Posted on 09/20/2013 4:29:03 AM PDT by spirited irish
You’re full of words, but lack two gray cells to rub together.
And that’s supposed to fool who?
Fools......
FR was explicitly declared not to be "anti-science" for a reason.
I’m sure you’re happy to provide grist for the liberal lurkers that love to paint FR and conservatives in general as anti-science Luddites who want to take us back to the Dark Ages.
And you’re proposing what?... stopping that?..
Never happen.. the secret is some freepers are RINOs.
Some are democrats... even some libertarian democrats..
being a freeper does not mean you must be smart...
Not catholics are catholics nor are all Americans americans and not all freepers are freepers..
It’s not what you say that counts it’s what you do and don’t do that counts..
Most scientists don’t do... they talk about doing.. and get credit for what someone else DID..
What's your evidence?
tacticalogic: Then you are, by any objective measure “anti-science”.
Spirited: Better watch your step hosepipe, one of the “witch doctors” has found you guilty of blaspheming the science totem. Burning at the stake will be next.
We don't do inquisitions and stake burnings.
To which hosepipe replied: “You do me a service I do not require. I’m not after the term ‘scientific method’; I’m after the very term ‘SCIENCE’.
"It has become a 'juju bag' term… a term for 'witch doctors' and “Gurus'... A bag full of bones and rattlers shaken to amaze the dumb and naive…."
Well, confronted with this exchange of views, I must say that I take side with hosepipe.
Dear tacticalogic, I don’t think I have ever said that the currently-understood scientific method is “fundamentally flawed.” My main — and only — criticism is that it is an “incomplete” method by which to understand Reality as fully engaged by human beings.
By which I mean to suggest that its very method is a limit on what can be known by human beings about the natural world.
Yet as my dear brother hosepipe is entirely correct to point out, to the extent that just because “science” enjoys such prestige nowadays, it succeeds in reducing the World of common experience to what can be observed and measured in “objective” Nature (i.e., that part of Nature that can be directly observed and measured). Given this limited mission, it cannot possibly address the biggest, most perplexing, even seemingly most “mysterious” aspects of common human historical experience — problems such as What is Life (why am I alive?); What is Consciousness/Mind (what are the sources and structures of my personal thoughts?); for what purpose(s) do I exist?
When the Logos — ultimate Truth as a standard of human judgment — has been abolished, such questions become meaningless. Thus people are free to discount/discredit such aspects of common human personal and historical/cultural experience/existence as unworthy of “serious” — that is to say, “scientific” — study. Talk about a "vicious circle!"
So dear tacticalogic, when you allege that such miscreants as hosepipe and moi, who it seems you feel are consumed with going after “a few ‘evil bastards’ that have taken up residence” as public “truth-speakers” of “modern science” (e.g., Dawkins, Lewontin, Dennett, Pinker, Singer, Monod, et al. — the "usual suspects" who qualify for "evil bastard" stature — that this proves this somehow results in the “tearing out the foundation” of science itself, I am not just a little perplexed.
You have made it very clear — and I do accept your findings — that “science” ultimately is all about what can be “observed and measured”; that is, subject to the “replicability of experiments,” on the sole basis of which the original finding can be verified by independent observers. Get enuf "consensus," then you know it's "true."
In short, we here have a case of "science" — and effectively of Life and Mind — conducted by public opinion poll.
While that understanding may give you great comfort in the “certainty” direction, there is still ever so much more in the common world of human experience that categorically cannot be measured in this way.
That is NOT so say that science is necessarily “flawed.” Its methods and techniques are eminently well-suited to its legitimate pursuits.
I suspect that what my dear brother hosepipe and I commonly object to is not the inherent limitations of the scientific method, but to the corruption of science itself (by folks who want to do philosophy/ideology, theology, and/or politics “under the color of science”) — so evident these days in the abuse of science for political, social/cultural, and/or economic ends.
I can give you a great analogy, dear tacticalgic, from the maths, that might shed further light on this issue. But I’ve already run on so long, I perceive I should give you a break for now.
But if you’re interested in the said analogy, please do feel free to get back to me!!!
And as for you, dear 'pipe, my brother in Christ: Meta-HUGS!!!
Thank you so much, dear hosepipe, for writing!
Reverend R7 Rocket's Blessed Sermon:
"Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. " - Hebrews 13:4
"For if she cheats, you get a sweet ride!"
- Book of Calloway, 1:14
"Whosoever spends on a stench trench betrays his brethren and shall be smitten with alimony. However, he who shall spend upon himself in the form of two wheeled transport shall be blessed and freed to enjoy all the Earth." - Epistle of Bro 5:28
"You shall know that the fruits of thy labor are for the enjoyment of yourself, and let the golf be played without fear or hesitation. Woe betide those who shall divert their funds away from motorcycles, beer, video games, and golf into the support of single mothers, for they shall be declared manginas, white knights, and Captain Save a Ho - deserving only of derision and contempt, forever cursed to pay alimony and child support. Know then that all goodness is bestowed upon he who Goes His Own Way, and all contempt is focused upon him who shall prevent a cock coozie from experiencing the consequences of her actions." - The Lamentations of MGTOW 1:74
"It is a great blessing and triumph to spend upon one's self and one's brothers: yay, let him who shall buy a round be counted among the blessed! And let he who shall pay the rent of a slattern, trollop, slut, skank, whore, or feminist be numbered among the accursed who shall forever wander the Earth forsaken looted of all they possess in the name of the sentinel of evil, Andrea Dworkin, the emissary of Lucifer upon Earth." - Revelations of Tom Leykis's Shade 8:21
"Put not your trust in princesses."
Manly Psalms 146:3
"Therefore shall a man leave his single mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall divorce with great woe."
Bluejeanesis: 2:24
"After desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."
James 1:15
Lieth not down with whores and witches lest thy loins be corrupted with disease and thy purse be barren forever.
Amen.
"I’m after the very term ‘SCIENCE’.
"It has become a 'juju bag' term… a term for 'witch doctors' and “Gurus'... A bag full of bones and rattlers shaken to amaze the dumb and naive…."
Then you say:
'That is NOT so say that science is necessarily “flawed.” Its methods and techniques are eminently well-suited to its legitimate pursuits.'
You want it both ways, and it's impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who does that.
In what way does that lovely post justify your deviant “sexual orientation?”
>> “You want it both ways” <<
.
No she doesn’t.
She merely pointed out that science has some legitimate use, when it doesn’t try to go beyond its logical limits.
She merely pointed out that science has some legitimate use, when it doesn’t try to go beyond its logical limits.
Science is just a tool. It doesn't try to do anything by itself. There are people who try to abuse it by trying to apply it beyond it's logical limits, but that's not the proposition she's agreed to. What she's agreed to is not just going after the people who abuse it, but going after science itself, in any context and any application, by anyone.
The Reverend R7 Rocket sayeth:
"Woe to ye, editor-surveyor, that ye give praise to Jezebel. Those who bless Jezebel are guilty of sexual deviance and shall be cursed and smitten by Saint Tom Leykis."
The Reverend has spoken.
I didn’t know that you had taken the name Jezebel. Are you a woman, or have you been “re-assigned?”
The Reverend has said that you are guilty of praising Jezebel.
Science is just a tool.
WRONG again.. science is PEOPLE.... people trying to be logical..
Science is not a “thing”.. it’s flawed humans attempting to understand.. i.e. be logical..
True..... some WORSHIP science... with a godlike dogma..
When IT-(science) takes on it’s “religious” characteristics is where I jump off the turnip cart..
Also; true I landed “funny”... and limp a little (metaphorically)..
And truth be told love pointing a finger at those on the cart.. with a snicker..
HEY!.. nobodys perfect..
I don’t agree with your assesment, but I’m glad the “science people” can provide entertainment for your inner bitch.
Spirited: Better watch your step hosepipe, one of the “witch doctors” has found you guilty of blaspheming the science totem. Burning at the stake will be next.
What dont kill you makes you stronger... AND
may be damned good entertainment..
You’ll get no praise from me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.