Truth and DLJ's manifesto
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-06-2014, 09:45 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 08:55 AM)Luminon Wrote:  We can know the truth about reality. If you disagree, you can only disagree on the grounds of reality.

I may need to mull this over a bit. It tickles some part of my brain... I'm just not certain which part ... or why. Drinking Beverage yet

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
06-06-2014, 09:53 AM (This post was last modified: 06-06-2014 09:58 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 09:34 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  How can pure energy be a principle? What do you mean by principle?

So if I shone a light in your eyes then this is an imperfect derivative of a principle?
Principle is something to which we can link instances. Imperfectly. Instances are more specific versions of something more general - a principle. Principles are true, necessary, general and certain statements about reality. Reality includes itself, philosophy is the discipline about reality and so philosophy can define itself. Just like a barber can and does shave himself too, in reality, right Cjlr?

Pure energy can be a principle because it is more difficult to say "why not?" If you say that everything is made out of energy and matter, you have to explain where the matter AND energy came from. If we say matter is convertible to energy (which is newly a proven fact of physics), we only have to explain energy. That's Occam's razor Wink

If you shine a light into my eyes, you did not act upon a principle. You have a big brain, lots of variability, you don't have to act upon a principle. In fact, you have to learn it. You have a choice. Sometimes the human ability to do nonsense amazes me more than the ability of logic. Natural objects such as particles can only follow the forces and fields in a logical way. People can act illogically and have to learn logic. Actually, they have to unlearn their culture and parenting, because as babies they start logical too. They start simple but rational, unlike the things we teach them, unlike all our culture.
( read Allison Gopnik: The Philosophical Baby)
http://www.amazon.com/Philosophical-Baby...hical+baby
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:07 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 09:53 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(06-06-2014 09:34 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  How can pure energy be a principle? What do you mean by principle?

So if I shone a light in your eyes then this is an imperfect derivative of a principle?
Principle is something to which we can link instances. Imperfectly. Instances are more specific versions of something more general - a principle. Principles are true, necessary, general and certain statements about reality. Reality includes itself, philosophy is the discipline about reality and so philosophy can define itself. Just like a barber can and does shave himself too, in reality, right Cjlr?

Pure energy can be a principle because it is more difficult to say "why not?" If you say that everything is made out of energy and matter, you have to explain where the matter AND energy came from. If we say matter is convertible to energy (which is newly a proven fact of physics), we only have to explain energy. That's Occam's razor Wink

If you shine a light into my eyes, you did not act upon a principle. You have a big brain, lots of variability, you don't have to act upon a principle. In fact, you have to learn it. You have a choice. Sometimes the human ability to do nonsense amazes me more than the ability of logic. Natural objects such as particles can only follow the forces and fields in a logical way. People can act illogically and have to learn logic. Actually, they have to unlearn their culture and parenting, because as babies they start logical too. They start simple but rational, unlike the things we teach them, unlike all our culture.
( read Allison Gopnik: The Philosophical Baby)
http://www.amazon.com/Philosophical-Baby...hical+baby

You are rapidly approaching the vapidity of post-modernism.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
06-06-2014, 10:07 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
Luminon, is there anyone else in the world that agrees with you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
06-06-2014, 10:32 AM (This post was last modified: 06-06-2014 10:42 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 10:07 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are rapidly approaching the vapidity of post-modernism.
Nope, quite opposite! I am asserting the true, necessary, certain and objective principles, which are eternal and absolute. That is the very opposite of post-modernism, which is relativistic.
The only thing in my repertoir that slightly approaches post-modernism is the paradigm theory of Thomas Kuhn, which I mentioned as "the gap between reality and language".

(06-06-2014 10:07 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Luminon, is there anyone else in the world that agrees with you?
Aristotle, I think. And Docent R. C. my philosophy teacher. And Stefan Molyneux, of course.
What I try to tell you is called noetics, gnoseology or epistemology, it is the undeniable justification of the rational method of knowledge and validity of philosophy in general. It won as a principle against the opposition of philosophical schools of Radical Skeptics, Sophists, nihilists, relativists, Cynics and so on. Polemics on Gorgias and such.

I basically told you the noetic proof for the rational knowledge. The noetic justification for empirical knowledge is a bit more complex and less solid. It is done through counter-arguments against the above mentioned schools such as radical skepticism (doubting everything), so it's kind of lenghthy - but that means empirical method is always open to more criticism - that is testing, which makes it superior to faith, reading animal entrails, or prophecy. In fact, testing is the very basis and justification of the empirical method!

Anyway, does it matter who agrees with me? If you can check the logic, doesn't matter if the whole world is against you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:38 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 10:32 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(06-06-2014 10:07 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are rapidly approaching the vapidity of post-modernism.
Nope, quite opposite! I am asserting the true, necessary, certain and objective principles, which are eternal and absolute. That is the very opposite of post-modernism, which is relativistic.
The only thing in my repertoir that slightly approaches post-modernism is the paradigm theory of Thomas Kuhn, which I mentioned as "the gap between reality and language".

I didn't say you were becoming post-modern, I said you are becoming vapid.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:40 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
Luminon, is there any physicist in the world that finds it useful to think that logic is the way that energy spreads through space-time and that logic is a basic property of nature?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 11:08 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 10:07 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Luminon, is there anyone else in the world that agrees with you?

I hope so.

The idea of a singularity scares me.

@ Lumi,
1am here so I'm hitting my metaphorical sack Dodgy

There were a few things in your reply that don't sit well with me and I'll take another look in the morning (my morning... relatively speaking).

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 11:17 AM (This post was last modified: 06-06-2014 11:26 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 10:40 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Luminon, is there any physicist in the world that finds it useful to think that logic is the way that energy spreads through space-time and that logic is a basic property of nature?
Why do you ask that? Do you need a dispensation from a priest in white labcoat? Tongue
There is no reason why they should, they don't need it to do physics, each field of science has its own language, instruments and criteria of success. Philosophy is distant and "basic" to physics in a similar way as mathematics, only more so, because it invented both rationalism and empiricism. You can not take the authority of physicists on philosophy, that is beyond their field. Physicists generally make lousy philosophers (see Stephen Hawking), Thomas Kuhn is a rare exception.

However, philosophers might find it very useful. Just like physicists search for the unified field theory that unites all natural forces, philosophers think towards monism. I am a monist too. However this monism is in English. The holy grail of philosophy is to find some way to link this work of human language to natural phenomena.
Why? Because it is a matter of defining human consciousness, human being, perhaps the soul, the world, everything. So far we can only define these things in English, which is mostly useless, because all the instruments are in engineering, chemistry, physics...
If philosophy could gain access to empirical sciences, we could create the objective science of morality, meaning of life, happiness, good, bliss, harmony, justice, all the things that religions ever promised and never delivered.
We could find the ever-sought link between the subjective and objective! We could build a golden age of human civilization. Actually, we can do most of that already by applying logic and moral philosophy to our own life, but it's always better to have an app for that Wink

I believe I have found a fit proposal for such a resolution of the subjective and objective, or a good direction for better future formulations. However, it's not in English and I refuse to translate it to people who still deal with basic premises and will have no use for it.

People keep the ways of civilization, because it almost works. People could do anything, but they don't know if that's the right thing to do. Earth is a rich planet and there's money and science and everything - but non-philosophical people are not sure what to do with them and if that would be worse than doing nothing. The goal of philosophers is to propose what to do, how life should be lived and how society should work. When society goes to shit (leftism, rightism, same thing) it's a fault of bad philosophy. Moral philosophy is extremely dangerous! All mass changes in society are justified by moral philosophy, so moral theoretical errors are a huge risk.

A piece of pseudoscience will cost you a few grand or will poison you with mercury, but a piece of moral pseudo-philosophy causes world wars, economical downfalls and totalitarian empires. Go figure. If moral philosophy doesn't raise your hackles, you don't understand moral philosophy. Moral philosophy is about the Research & Development of human consciousness, preferably on mass scale, it's what religion would do if it worked.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Luminon's post
06-06-2014, 11:21 AM
RE: Truth and DLJ's manifesto
(06-06-2014 11:17 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(06-06-2014 10:40 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Luminon, is there any physicist in the world that finds it useful to think that logic is the way that energy spreads through space-time and that logic is a basic property of nature?
Why do you ask that? Do you need a dispensation from a priest in white labcoat? Tongue

This is why your "science" is bullshit. This stupid belief that you know better than everyone else. Everything you have said in this thread has been double talk.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: