Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
No, but the limitations can be removed or pushed back....happens all the time. It is different from religious dogma in that regard.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Science has its limitations. Can it exceed them?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Science has its limitations. Can it exceed them?
Some of the main (wrong, according to my opinion) axioms of exact sciences are:
1.Sciences like physics have excluded anything spiritual from the “equations” of the universe.
2.All natural laws are universal and apply to everything and everyone.
3.All things are measurable.
4.We can know everything.
5.Our Logic works correctly.
6.Everything can be replicated in an experiment.
7.Mediocrity and Copernican principle
8. Dialethism is false.
9.Time exists.
10.The notion of “change” exists:
11.The whole can be analyzed if we examine its parts.
The limits of science
Please
Regards
Some of the main (wrong, according to my opinion) axioms of exact sciences are:
1.Sciences like physics have excluded anything spiritual from the “equations” of the universe.
2.All natural laws are universal and apply to everything and everyone.
3.All things are measurable.
4.We can know everything.
5.Our Logic works correctly.
6.Everything can be replicated in an experiment.
7.Mediocrity and Copernican principle
8. Dialethism is false.
9.Time exists.
10.The notion of “change” exists:
11.The whole can be analyzed if we examine its parts.
The limits of science
Please
Regards
Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
I perused the website. Not much into philosophy.
I reject premise 1, 3,4,6. They are untrue
I do not know of any such pronouncements by the science community.
Logic has been proven a reliable tool. What other method would you think is superior?
9. Time does exist...I don't get the point???
10. the notion of change exists, or you would not have known of the notion yourself and could not have made the statement about said notion.Your statement seems to be self refuting.
I have no idea what Dialtheism is...should I care?
11. The whole can be analyzed if we examine it's parts is true, especially if we have all of the parts. Why would you have an issue with that?
siti
Well-Known Member
Well, apart from no 1 I don't believe science takes any of these statements as axiomatic. Certainly physics, by definition (etymologically and scientifically) excludes any "spiritual" explanation. But the best of all is no. 8 which is logically - well hilarious actually (anyone else spot that?) - thanks for the laugh 
siti
Well-Known Member
Expanding on no 8...dialetheism (which is not - as you might think - the belief that one can talk to God directly on a old telephone) is essentially the idea that a statement can be both true and false at the same time, so the statement:
dialetheism is false
may be either true or false; if its true then dialetheism is false and the imputed (by paarsurry) claim of science is correct; if on the other hand the statement is false, then dialetheism is true and the statement may then be both true and false at the same time and the imputed claim is still correct...
...however, I don't think science really claims this anyway and I can't think of any way of interpreting some aspects of quantum physics (duality for example) philosophically except as a form of dialetheism...so it seems the fact(s) (rather than the statement) is, in a sense, dialetheic (i.e. some facts are inherently both true and false simultaneously - as bizarre as that sounds)...
...but that's probably just my (mis)take - seems like religionists "know" more about science than scientists after all (which statement is probably another kind of dialetheism - or maybe is just sarcasm - is that allowed in here?)
dialetheism is false
may be either true or false; if its true then dialetheism is false and the imputed (by paarsurry) claim of science is correct; if on the other hand the statement is false, then dialetheism is true and the statement may then be both true and false at the same time and the imputed claim is still correct...
...however, I don't think science really claims this anyway and I can't think of any way of interpreting some aspects of quantum physics (duality for example) philosophically except as a form of dialetheism...so it seems the fact(s) (rather than the statement) is, in a sense, dialetheic (i.e. some facts are inherently both true and false simultaneously - as bizarre as that sounds)...
...but that's probably just my (mis)take - seems like religionists "know" more about science than scientists after all (which statement is probably another kind of dialetheism - or maybe is just sarcasm - is that allowed in here?)
Last edited:
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Science will admit they don't know everything, but religion in most cases believe they do know everything, arrogance ?, yes.
Point of what?
Woah...Hang on. You mean to say God of the Gaps is being joined by Religion of the Gaps?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Even if improved, science will never become perfect, will have limitations that cannot be surpassed.
Regards
Awesome!!
Philosophers have limitations, can they learn to be clear?
Historians have limitations, can they get their story straight.
Mathematicians have limitations, can they ever get their numbers right?
Politicians have limitations will the crowd ever realize that?
Musicians have limitiations, usually talent plays some role in that.
I have limitations. I write on religious forums instead of getting on with my God DAMN book.
That's a rather 18th century european German idealism of mechanical objectivity that Goethe resoundly attacks as being bogus for good reason. That creates a false sense of independence from reality of one's own existence that sees without feeling as if that's actually possible. It's a kind of denial that has been historically fundemental in religion of DENY the flesh. So what you are saying is the harsh denial of emotions is scientific? Priests believed this!!!
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Science has no limits.
However that does not mean it is much help in understanding such things as religion or magic...
Which are not subject to logic or reason, or to experimental testing.
However that does not mean it is much help in understanding such things as religion or magic...
Which are not subject to logic or reason, or to experimental testing.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
"Philosophers have limitations, can they learn to be clear?
Historians have limitations, can they get their story straight.
Mathematicians have limitations, can they ever get their numbers right?
Politicians have limitations will the crowd ever realize that?
Musicians have limitations, usually talent plays some role in that."
Like science they should remain within their limits.
It is another thing that when science tries to exceed its limits it becomes gibberish! Right? Please
Regards
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
What does this even mean? When has science ever tried to exceed its limits?
I think they used to call it sin in the bible now they claim it as being a believer and saved in religion!! Yes to your question.
jtartar
Well-Known Member
paarsurrey,
There are definite limitations that are above science, things called Extrascientific, like faith, and other things pertaining to God. Science itself admits this, without question!!! Think about all the things mentioned as fruits of the spirit at Gallatians 5:22,23. Science does not understand why we love beauty or music or beautiful scenery or GOD.
The fact is much of important things in life are hidden from science, but they do great things, and overcome limitations every day!
Last edited:
siti
Well-Known Member
I (for one) am perfectly happy to acknowledge your superiority in the field of gibberish, which, as you rightly suggest, is beyond the limits of science - where it sits quite comfortably alongside religion. So we're all agreed now! I can give up on this thread too - I love it when we reach consensus rather than one side or the other "winning"!
Jeremiahcp
Well-Known Jerk
Science exceeds it limits all the time. With advances in technology we are pushing the limits of science far beyond what they use to be. Science is always redefining its limits.
Religion on the other hand, moves at a much slower pace then science. You all have still yet to prove this life after death deal, and the god concept. In fact you all can't even agree what those two things even are. And how many thousands of years has it been?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
"Science is always redefining its limits"
Despite the continuing expansion or even explosion of information, there will forever be limits beyond which the devices of science cannot lead a man.
— June Singer
In Boundaries of the Soul
Please— June Singer
In Boundaries of the Soul
Regards
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Did June Singer have any science education?
IMHO, science knows it well even if not perfectly. They have measured the harmonal levels and have traced the brain currents.
Last edited:
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I like one's post.
Regards