The Essential Nature of the Sciences

[atanu]

Uh...no.
That aint it, for all that you illustrate
the reasons.

Phil majors are tiresome in much the
same way mimes are.

I do not see the connection with 'mimes'.

My understanding of philosophy or 'Darshana' as it is called in Sanskrit is that it is not dry. 'Darshana' is view of existence that helps one to navigate through the existence better.

 

[Audie]

I do not see the connection with 'mimes'.

My understanding of philosophy or 'Darshana' as it is called in Sanskrit is that it is not dry. 'Darshana' is view of existence that helps one to navigate through the existence better.

Its ok, i dont see the connection berween what i say / you say or you say /
I say either.

 

[atanu]

The question "How empirical scientific method can study the subject that has subjective experiences?" remains unanswered, however.

 

[Sunstone]

The question "How empirical scientific method can study the subject that has subjective experiences?" remains unanswered, however.

Can you explain why you think that's a meaningful question, please?

 

[atanu]

Can you explain why you think that's a meaningful question, please?

Do you think that study of the subject that knows the objects is not meaningful? If meaningful, then I wish to know your view whether the 4 point protocol you outlined in the OP will be sufficient for such study of the self?

In my view, enquiry into the self is more important than the study of objects of the self.

 

[Sunstone]

Do you think that study of the subject that knows the objects is not meaningful? If yes, then I wish to know your view whether the 4 point protocol you outlined in the OP will be sufficient for such study of the self?

In my view, enquiry into the self is more important than the study of objects of the self.

I'm not sure how your comments address my question. Could you elaborate, please?

 

[atanu]

The sciences are the most reliable method of inquiry that humanity has yet devised. ....

1) Create an hypothesis,
2) Logically deduce a consequence of your hypothesis --
3) Test your hypothesis.
4) Submit your procedure and results for peer review.​

Questions? Comments?

How these steps can apply to subjective consciousness and the subject?

I'm not sure how your comments address my question. Could you elaborate, please?

I have shown summary of the OP. You invited for questions and comments (shown in red above). So I asked how the 4 steps could be applied if the subject of the study was the subject itself.

IOW, suppose, if we were to study "My experience of eating a mango", and the nature of the 'my' in the sentence 'My experience of eating a mango', how would we apply the 4 point protocol?

Does it clarify?

 

[Native]

It is simply not true that a whole theory has to be discarded when contrary evidence is found. That is ONE of the options, but another is to see if something previously unknown is affecting things. Both options need to be investigated and the one that best fits the evidence chosen. In the case of galactic rotation curves, that means dark matter is supported.

"Dark matter" doesn´t belong to "something previously unknown affects"! It´s a pure speculative invention crutch in order to save the gravitational idea which was directly contradicted by the galactic rotation curve.

These speculative "dark this or that" inventions are all results of scientists and laymen looking at cosmos from 1/4 of the fundamental forces instead of interpreting cosmos from all 4 fundamental forces.

The Newtonian Gravity is useless in the cosmic scales and leads to all kinds of strange speculative ideas and pure metaphysical forces.

 

[PureX]

Hmm....I see them as helping us to communicate values, and perceptions, and meanings. But I don't see any of those as being the same as 'truth'.

How are these things not a significant part of the 'truth of us'? How are they not directly determining what we deem to be 'true'?

So, the arts can help us *appreciate* truths.

Not just to appreciate the truth, but to recognize it, and to understand why we are recognizing it as we are.

 

[Polymath257]

How are these things not a significant part of the 'truth of us'? How are they not directly determining what we deem to be 'true'?
Not just to appreciate the truth, but to recognize it, and to understand why we are recognizing it as we are.

OK, on this I disagree. Recognizing the truth has nothing to do with art. That is a matter of testing and observation. Art has a different role (although valuable for us humans). Values, perceptions, and meanings are how *we* order our own lives. They do not determine the truth. if anything, they tend to get in the way of finding the truth because they blind us to the possibilities.

 

[`mud]

Am I the only one lost in this thread ?

 

[Audie]

Am I the only one lost in this thread ?

A heavy fogbank or jack-philosophical
obscurantism hath descended o'er all.

 

[gnostic]

I will ask God and tell you, whenever "He" will answer me your question, Okay ?

Oh, that’s not needed. If you were to give me number, I could call him and ask him myself?

* psst psst psst psst * (chinu whispers his reply)

What?

God has no mobile? What sort of dinosaur of a god that don’t have a mobile phone in this day and age?

 

[`mud]

A heavy fogbank or jack-philosophical
obscurantism hath descended o'er all.

I love that post !!!

 

[PureX]

OK, on this I disagree. Recognizing the truth has nothing to do with art. That is a matter of testing and observation. Art has a different role (although valuable for us humans). Values, perceptions, and meanings are how *we* order our own lives. They do not determine the truth. if anything, they tend to get in the way of finding the truth because they blind us to the possibilities.

I don't think you have any idea what art is, or what it's for (in our money/material-obsessed culture, few do). Why do you think every human culture that has ever existence created painted images, carved sculptures, told and wrote stories, acted them out in plays, and in dances, and sang songs, worshiped the power of nature and anthropomorphized circumstances? Why do you think people today watch TV and go to movies and to concerts? What do you think they are seeking and gaining from all these activities? What are they seeing and hearing that is important enough to them that they will spend hours every day and lots of money to keep pursuing it, and do so all their lives?

 

[Polymath257]

I don't think you have any idea what art is, or what it's for (in our money/material-obsessed culture, few do). Why do you think every human culture that has ever existence created painted images, carved sculptures, told and wrote stories, acted them out in plays, and in dances, and sang songs, worshiped the power of nature and anthropomorphized circumstances? Why do you think people today watch TV and go to movies and to concerts? What do you think they are seeking and gaining from all these activities? What are they seeing and hearing that is important enough to them that they will spend hours every day and lots of money to keep pursuing it, and do so all their lives?

I also love to go to art museums, to concerts, see statures and architecture. I find them to be moving and an important aspect of life.

I just don't find them to be 'truth'.

Why have people done this for all of history going back 20,000 years? because they find art to be moving. They find meaning in it. They enjoy it. And so do I.

It just isn't the same thing as truth.

 

[PureX]

I also love to go to art museums, to concerts, see statures and architecture. I find them to be moving and an important aspect of life.

I just don't find them to be 'truth'.

Why have people done this for all of history going back 20,000 years? because they find art to be moving. They find meaning in it. They enjoy it. And so do I.

It just isn't the same thing as truth.

They do it because they see and hear and experience and understand the truth in it.

 

[Polymath257]

They do it because they see and hear and experience and understand the truth in it.

That isn't what the word 'truth' means. They experience something that moves them, I agree. That doesn't have to be 'truth'.

 

[Audie]

I also love to go to art museums, to concerts, see statures and architecture. I find them to be moving and an important aspect of life.

I just don't find them to be 'truth'.

Why have people done this for all of history going back 20,000 years? because they find art to be moving. They find meaning in it. They enjoy it. And so do I.

It just isn't the same thing as truth.

'Tis he, not thee, who knoweth not the
purpose of art.

 

[Audie]

I don't think you have any idea what art is, or what it's for (in our money/material-obsessed culture, few do). Why do you think every human culture that has ever existence created painted images, carved sculptures, told and wrote stories, acted them out in plays, and in dances, and sang songs, worshiped the power of nature and anthropomorphized circumstances? Why do you think people today watch TV and go to movies and to concerts? What do you think they are seeking and gaining from all these activities? What are they seeing and hearing that is important enough to them that they will spend hours every day and lots of money to keep pursuing it, and do so all their lives?

They all do it for the same reason, but few are aware
of the reason?