• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Science cannot explain consciousness, therefore....

abaddon said:
The inherent problem with all of this rampant solipsism is that all of it's proponents act as if they don't believe a word of it.

Get up in the morning and shave those imaginary whiskers, do they? Why?

Have a shower because what?

Why have any concern crossing the road? Even if an 18 wheeler hits you, it doesn't matter because the 18 wheeler is not real.

That is what solipsism fails.

None of it's proponents actually believes a damn word of it. Else clip shows on TV would be full of such Darwin award nominees.
Click to expand...

Let us say that I am a Boltzmann brain. That I don't believe that nor act as if I am one, wont stop me from being a Boltzmann brain.
Your argument fails in the following manner:
If you believe that you are not a Boltzmann brain, that will not determine whether you are a Boltzmann brain or not.
Try again.

P.S. It is not the first time I have heard this line of reasoning, but it still doesn't work.
 
Objective is better than subjective with regard to empiricism [ science ] or logic [ mathematics ] This is not a subjective
view but an objective one. Saying it is subjective somewhat implies that it could be wrong and that is definitely not true
 
surreptitious57 said:
Objective is better than subjective with regard to empiricism [ science ] or logic [ mathematics ] This is not a subjective
view but an objective one. Saying it is subjective somewhat implies that it could be wrong and that is definitely not true
Click to expand...

Yes, objective is better than subjective with regard to empiricism [ science ] or logic [ mathematics ]. But that doesn't in general make objectivity better than subjectivity. Neither science nor mathematics is everything when it comes to the human condition.
 
Tommy Jeppesen said:
Religious people do something subjective and that can be shared inter-subjectively.
Click to expand...
So What? Making up fantasy stuff and sharing it with others isn’t the preserve of religious people. All paranormal believers do it. Fiction writers do it. Liars do it.

Tommy Jeppesen said:
It can be observed, described and explained using science,
Click to expand...
Yes .

Tommy Jeppesen said:
but science can't answer - what is the meaning with life? - because that is subjective/inter-subjective.
Click to expand...
No. Science can’t answer because it isn’t a logical/meaningful question that can be logically/meaningfully answered. Before “what is” can be answered it first has to be established that “there is”. Merely believing that life must and does have some meaning doesn’t establish it actually does. Might as well ask "What is the colour of dragons?"

Tommy Jeppesen said:
It doesn't mean that I am religious. It just means I know that science can't answer - what is the meaning with life?
Click to expand...
Like some other members on this forum your often repeated “I’m not religious” claim contradicts the strong smell of your apparent religiosity.
 
Last edited:
Tommy Jeppesen said:
Neither science nor mathematics is everything when it comes to the human condition
Click to expand...

No they are not but what they are however are the two most rigorous disciplines there are so if accuracy is what you are seeking that is
where you go. The best disciplines for examining the human condition are not science and mathematics but philosophy and psychology
 
ynot said:
...

No. Science can’t answer because it isn’t a logical/meaningful question that can be logically/meaningfully answered. Before “what is” can be answered it first has to be established that “there is”. Merely believing that life must and does have some meaning doesn’t establish it actually does. Might as well ask "What is the colour of dragons?"

...
Click to expand...

Please explain what you mean by meaningful?

That I find it meaningful to do philosophy is what makes it meaningful to me and subjective. That you apparently don't find philosophy meaningful is meaningful to you and subjective. How you intent to use science and logic on that is beyond me, because of the following:
Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical, is neither logical or is it a scientific statement. It is a first person subjective and biased interpretation.
Look: "Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical." Now give evidence for that using only science. You can't, because the statement - "Only that which can be answered by science is meaningful and logical" - is neither science nor logical and it is only meaningful, if you find it meaningful.

It appears that you are using some form of feelings and/or emotions and that you don't like philosophy. That is okay with me and it doesn't make it wrong, nor you wrong. It just means that you are subjective.
 
surreptitious57 said:
No they are not but what they are however are the two most rigorous disciplines there are so if accuracy is what you are seeking that is
where you go. The best disciplines for examining the human condition are not science and mathematics but philosophy and psychology
Click to expand...

We agree :)
 
surreptitious57 said:
No they are not but what they are however are the two most rigorous disciplines there are so if accuracy is what you are seeking that is
where you go. The best disciplines for examining the human condition are not science and mathematics but philosophy and psychology
Click to expand...
If your "human condition" is badly injured in an accident you will be consulting philosophers and psychologists? Yeah right!
 
ynot said:
If your "human condition" is badly injured in an accident you will be consulting philosophers and psychologists? Yeah right!
Click to expand...
So reality is being badly injured in an accident? That is all there is to reality. So victims of injury use psychology to learn to live with their injuries. Does that mean that they are religious?
 
Tommy Jeppesen said:
Then please do so and explain the methodology of establishing the truth of reality.
Click to expand...
The scientific method.

Your turn . . .

What can answer "What is the meaning with life?".

What is the methodology of establishing the answer?

What is the answer?
 
The human condition is a reference to our existence in the grand scheme of things and
has got nothing to do with physical injury because it pertains to the mind not the body
 
surreptitious57 said:
The human condition is a reference to our existence in the grand scheme of things and
has got nothing to do with physical injury because it pertains to the mind not the body
Click to expand...
"The human condition is the characteristics, key events, and situations which compose the essentials of human existence, such as birth, growth, emotionality, aspiration, conflict, and mortality" -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_condition

Key events like birth pertain only to the mind and not the body?

I would say a serious accident is a key event that pertains to mortality.
 
Last edited:
Tommy Jeppesen said:
What is the scientific method
Click to expand...

A means by which observable phenomena are objectively studied using observation / experimentation
/ replication / evidence / inter subjectivity / testable hypotheses / potential falsification / peer review
 
To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry is commonly based on empirical or measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.
Click to expand...

Okay, so you find this meaningful. Now give evidence for that based on empirical or measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.
You can't because A) it is not empirical or measurable evidence that you find it meaningful and B) you have given no reason other than that you find it meaningful.

I get that you like science, but that you like science is not a scientific claim. It is a claim about what you find meaningful or if you like: To you the meaning of life is do science.

ynot said:
...

Your turn . . .

What can answer "What is the meaning with life?".

What is the methodology of establishing the answer?

What is the answer?
Click to expand...

A person can answer about what she/he find meaningful. You have do so. You find science meaningful.

The methodology is to ask a person.

The answer is the answer the person gives.
 
surreptitious57 said:
A means by which observable phenomena are objectively studied using observation / experimentation
/ replication / evidence / inter subjectivity / testable hypotheses / potential falsification / peer review
Click to expand...

Yes, that has nothing to do if it would make me happy leaving a building through a window on the 20th floor. (the example is ynot's earlier in the thread)
 
ynot said:
"The human condition is the characteristics, key events, and situations which compose the essentials of human existence, such as birth, growth, emotionality, aspiration, conflict, and mortality" -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_condition

Key events like birth pertain only to the mind and not the body?
I would say a serious accident is a key event that pertains to mortality.
Click to expand...

No it pertains both to the mind and the body.
That you find science meaningful is in your mind and I can only replicate it, if I think/feel like you. You can't observe that science is meaningful and it is only meaningful to you, if it is so.

Why did you live out emotionality?
Answer that!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom