Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Science and observation

Vision13
Posts: 38
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?
HumbleThinker1
Posts: 144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 5:44:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM, Vision13 wrote:
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?

If I understand your question, it is certainly possible that the most likely position based on the evidence is wrong. Science never guarantees that the most likely position will be the correct one. But we simply do not have a better way of arriving at correct and useful conclusions about the natural world than via the scientific method. To add, I will add a quote by John Stuart Mill: "Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think."
Vision13
Posts: 38
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 6:04:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/8/2014 5:44:45 PM, HumbleThinker1 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM, Vision13 wrote:
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?

If I understand your question, it is certainly possible that the most likely position based on the evidence is wrong. Science never guarantees that the most likely position will be the correct one. But we simply do not have a better way of arriving at correct and useful conclusions about the natural world than via the scientific method. To add, I will add a quote by John Stuart Mill: "Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think."

I think that, we can say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth. Indeed, each scientific theory or not is based on unprovables things. We can say nothing we even cannot say if the truth exist or not. The truth is that we understand nothing we cannot say that even because we don't know if this proposition : ' we cannot say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth ', ect. We even cannot have the right to express a proposal because that there is necessarily in doubt the one that I have just expressed there... The logic isn't self consistant.
HumbleThinker1
Posts: 144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 7:28:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/8/2014 6:04:00 PM, Vision13 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 5:44:45 PM, HumbleThinker1 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM, Vision13 wrote:
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?

If I understand your question, it is certainly possible that the most likely position based on the evidence is wrong. Science never guarantees that the most likely position will be the correct one. But we simply do not have a better way of arriving at correct and useful conclusions about the natural world than via the scientific method. To add, I will add a quote by John Stuart Mill: "Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think."

I think that, we can say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth. Indeed, each scientific theory or not is based on unprovables things. We can say nothing we even cannot say if the truth exist or not. The truth is that we understand nothing we cannot say that even because we don't know if this proposition : ' we cannot say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth ', ect. We even cannot have the right to express a proposal because that there is necessarily in doubt the one that I have just expressed there... The logic isn't self consistant.

Certainty is unnecessary. That we have advanced, for better and for worse, despite less than 100% knowledge derived from scientific endeavor supports this.
HumbleThinker1
Posts: 144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 7:29:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/8/2014 7:28:19 PM, HumbleThinker1 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 6:04:00 PM, Vision13 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 5:44:45 PM, HumbleThinker1 wrote:
At 6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM, Vision13 wrote:
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?

If I understand your question, it is certainly possible that the most likely position based on the evidence is wrong. Science never guarantees that the most likely position will be the correct one. But we simply do not have a better way of arriving at correct and useful conclusions about the natural world than via the scientific method. To add, I will add a quote by John Stuart Mill: "Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think."

I think that, we can say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth. Indeed, each scientific theory or not is based on unprovables things. We can say nothing we even cannot say if the truth exist or not. The truth is that we understand nothing we cannot say that even because we don't know if this proposition : ' we cannot say nothing because nothing is assured by the truth ', ect. We even cannot have the right to express a proposal because that there is necessarily in doubt the one that I have just expressed there... The logic isn't self consistant.

Certainty is unnecessary. That we have advanced, for better and for worse, despite less than 100% knowledge derived from scientific endeavor supports this.

...despite less than 100% certain knowledge
tahir.imanov
Posts: 272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 8:35:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/8/2014 5:35:34 PM, Vision13 wrote:
Physics is a theorical and especially, a experimental science. That's why, this category of science cannot be reasonably questioned coach, indeed, to deny observation means denying the world and our own existence... This category of reasoning applies to any experimental science such as biology, geophysics or chemistry.
Therefore, I ask you this next question: It's an end in itself ? Could we be right against the fact ?

You are arguing for empiricism, although we get most of knowledge through empirical evidence (actually scientist get most of knowledge through empirical evidence, and we get them as testimony), it would be foolish to say "I only accept empirical evidence." Reason is there are certain truths which we accept at face value. Physics mainly deal with observations and tests, but it is nothing without Mathematics, and Mathematics based on axioms conventions and etc. which most of it you cannot prove empirically.

Not everything in physics is fact. For example, if existence of is "fact", then gravity is "almost fact", and special relativity is "near to almost fact". Instead of classifying theories and etc. as facts, it would be wise to classify them based on "degree of plausibility".

There is only one fact, and that is ......
This is red.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2014 5:23:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
that is... I am awesome. As in awe inspiring, as in that is me, that is the only fact there is.
Vision13
Posts: 38
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2014 6:59:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/9/2014 5:23:17 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
that is... I am awesome. As in awe inspiring, as in that is me, that is the only fact there is.

Troll