Did Roger or Francis Bacon Really Discover The Scientific Method ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-12-2011, 02:16 PM
RE: Did Roger or Francis Bacon Really Discover The Scientific Method ?
Welcome to the forum AbdelZ Smile By demonstrating that you can admit when you're wrong (well, OK, it was a tiny admit Wink ), you have shown that you are a real man. I look forward to many interesting discussions with you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2011, 02:36 PM (This post was last modified: 19-12-2011 02:58 PM by AbdelZ.)
RE: Did Roger or Francis Bacon Really Discover The Scientific Method ?
(19-12-2011 01:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(19-12-2011 01:17 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  
(19-12-2011 01:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(19-12-2011 12:29 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Do not play the smart wise guy with me haha by trying to be ironic : that might hurt you when u watch Harris ' video haha like a boomerang that missed its target hitting u back in the face = i do not want u to get hurt that way haha :
but then again, no pain no gain , no guts no glory

That fact serves a purpose = the fact that water consists of oxygen & hydrogen serves a purpose =life consists mainly of water , & indeed especially of carbon ....= that's not a random thing = fact joins morality = inseparable like Harris said in the above mentioned video
Whose purpose? Life emerges from the chemistry, there is no purpose to chemistry.
Quote:Another example he gave : smoking causes lung cancer ( i am smoking while writing this , silly dummy me haha ) = that's a fact

so, it's not good to smoke = morality

science can thus serve as a morality guide too , not just as a provider of ...facts

I do add to that : science can be a source of easthetics too = facts joined with easthetics = facts morality easthetics & the rest are ...inseparable

Wow, you completely and utterly misunderstood Sam Harris.


Chemistry has a purpose , everything has, no time for more , sorry , later then

Whose purpose?

Quote:Just this :

I did understand Harris : if u read my words when i presented his video , i just corrected him from the islamic perspective

Yes, I see I misread your comment on the Harris video.
However, you 'correct' him by saying more of the same things you've been saying. Science is methodology, not 'cultural narrative'.


No, u still do not understand me completely :
what purpose ?

well, the universe was not made randomly just like that for nothing : it has a purpose

Look , we both start from different references , so , we both get different results as consequences :

which of one of our both results is true is a long story

Further more :
Do not forget that muslims were the ones who discovered & practiced the scientific method for the first time ever in the history of mankind thanks to the Qur'an mainly , discovered evolution before Darwin was even born & much more

I corrected that intolerant Harris from the islamic point of view : the islamic ethics , epistemology, easthetics , metaphysics ......while he was driven by materialistic monism , materialistic epistemology ....:

I agree with what he said concerning the fact that morality & science are in fact inseparable while their natures are different but i disagree with the rest of his plea ,due to the fact , that we both start from different references & thus get different results as consequences

Besides :

Science itself is just a form of culture , a social human activity , just a representation of reality, practiced by scientists humans through their biological psychological social political ideological cultural & other backgrounds , despite the fact that science is highly disciplined & methodic

(19-12-2011 02:16 PM)morondog Wrote:  Welcome to the forum AbdelZ Smile By demonstrating that you can admit when you're wrong (well, OK, it was a tiny admit Wink ), you have shown that you are a real man. I look forward to many interesting discussions with you.

Oh, i missed this , sorry , thanks , man , appreciate

It's mutual


Where is that edit button ?

well, i am wrong about many things : i am ignorant of many other things : life is a dynamic natural endless learning -growing process : i do not credit myself for admitting a ...fact of life , so

Thanks ,buddy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes AbdelZ's post
20-12-2011, 01:24 PM (This post was last modified: 20-12-2011 01:28 PM by AbdelZ.)
RE: Did Roger or Francis Bacon Really Discover The Scientific Method ?
Which part of materialism do u want me to criticize ?

The materialistic prescriptive interpretative speculative ideological "fact " that life is just a matter of "material processes " that has nothing to do with the material descriptive scientific facts or what exactly ? haha

Worse : that materialistic approach of life that goes all the way back to the 18th century at least as a result of the bloody conflict against the medieval church= Euro-centric , is imposed to science as a "scientific fact " = outrageous :


Outrageous as a judgement of value concerning those monistic ethics of materialism imposed to science that can be traced back to Spinoza's ethics or monism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2011, 02:11 PM (This post was last modified: 22-12-2011 02:30 PM by AbdelZ.)
RE: Did Roger or Francis Bacon Really Discover The Scientific Method ?
http://www.archive.org/details/makingofh...00brifrich

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/iqbal/index.html

http://www.feedbooks.com/userbook/14177/...slam%5DThe


http://www.feedbooks.com/userbook/14136/...ts-of-self


http://www.muslimheritage.com

http://www.1001inventions.com

http://www.1001inventions.com/1001inventions
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: