Pelosi says Biden shouldn't debate Trump:
- Thread starter dukkha
- Start date
Digest away! I'll be happy to answer any questions on this when you have gone through it.
Sure will....my project is trying to figure out what went wrong....the West, Science, caring about truth, the human spirit...what has caused this collapse. I have recently been listening as Bret and Heather talk about this....how the university collapsed, how they see so much junk science, the intersection of science with the failed university, entire fields of grievance "science" set up that are not even remotely science.
My batch of questions to you was related to something I read maybe a decade ago, a long argument that at lot of what has gone wrong is that scientists have allowed themselves to have their minds captivated by models, equations and data not seeing that their numbers dont mean what they they think they mean because they dont understand the real world...they understand their silos of numbers which is enough to power a career but their work not only does not help us it deceives us...they have allowed themselves to be deceived and then these experts spread their bad thinking through the society, that this is why we cant do things well anymore, this is why science failed to produce what society needs, this is why science is now in such ill repute.
But they you keep talking about how little math and numbers matter, that this is not science....
Bret and Heather keep talking about how they keep reading papers with bad data and conclusions that are not supported by the data as everyone should be able to see but few claim to see it.
Bret talks about how with his experience with his theory on telomeres proved how little scientists care about the truth when new truth upsets the applecart of careers built on false truth.
But up till now I have not paid enough attention to what science is and what it is not, I have too often gone with other peoples claims of what is science, which are often wrong.
I need to process what you said, integrate it into other things that I know....then I will surely be back with questions.... and I will try hard to make my questions of higher quality than my last questions.
Last edited:
Into the Night
Contributor
Science hasn't collapsed. Neither has society (despite the riots you see). Not all universities have gone bad, but many have. I'll get to why in a minute.
Largely true.
Yes, there are a lot of 'scientists' that deny science. They do it for the money. That money comes from a single source: the government.
We actually can. There are still people that understand and treat science for what it is. There are a lot of other very talented people out there quietly producing the things you use every day. They are good products. True, there's a lot of crap products out there, but there's a lot of good ones too.
Science doesn't 'produce' anything that society 'needs'. It is not a production line.
Math and numbers matter, but it is not science. It is mathematics. You will find that in places like the Church of Global Warming and the Church of Green, they deny both science and mathematics. People who have degrees in 'climatology' are no different. They are just priests of these religions.
Science isn't data. Data isn't science. Anyone who says it is is denying science. Data is the result of an observation, and is therefore subject to the problems of phenomenology.
This has long been a problem with science. It hit Galileo and Kepler as well. When someone falsifies a theory like Galileo did, 'scientists' will hang on like grim death to the old way of thinking.
Science is defined by philosophy. Philosophy itself is nothing more than reasoned arguments. It has basically only one rule: you must present your own arguments. You cannot use the arguments of others as your own. Over the years, science has had several different philosophers try to define it. Currently a simplified version of the philosophies of Karl Popper make the most sense when it comes to define 'science' and 'religion'.
Don't assume they were bad questions. They were legitimate questions. There is a lot to absorb here. It takes time.
Thanks, I was not expecting that.
Question: Is it true that the West is awash in bad thinking, like historically bad, our ancestors usually managed better?
Question2: Is it true that philosophy has been mostly dead for a long time, that was passes for new philosophy work is almost always utter crap not worth spending any time on?
Into the Night
Contributor
No. Illiteracy has always been a problem, and it has been much worse in the past. As for the use of philosophy, most people don't even realize they're using it, but they are, when presenting a reasoned argument that is their own. The schools generally don't teach this anymore. Their 'philosophy' classes is really just a smattering of phenomenology and a few paradoxes (the sound of one hand clapping, prove this chair doesn't exist, etc). The nice thing about philosophy is that you don't have to have formal training in it to use it. Practice always helps, like anything else.
This where the internet comes in. Too many people today just grab something they googled or found on Wikipedia and make that their argument, as if they were presenting a reasoned argument. I call these Holy Links or Holy Quotes. That's what they are. They are stealing someone's argument as if it were their own, and have become so lazy they are unable to think for themselves. They just cut and paste, never realizing how the argument they stole was reasoned (or ill reasoned).
This is a related question to 1), and as you see it's answered there. No, philosophy is not dead. People do use it today, oft times without even realizing it. There are also a lot of people that simply can't think for themselves and tend to despise philosophy as 'egghead' stuff and not applicable to anything.
Every time someone makes their own reasoned argument, that's philosophy. It is not a proof, it is not a True nor a False. It is simply a reasoned argument. Philosophy is an open functional system and has no proofs nor the power of prediction.
You are probably wondering what an 'open functional system' and a 'closed functional system' actually are. Let's take mathematics as our first example, which is a closed functional system:
Mathematics is defined by a set of axioms, like the rules of a board game. Follow the rules and you can play the game. Follow the rules of mathematics, and you can play that game. Break any rule and you are no longer playing that game. You are playing something else, or not playing at all. It is the same with mathematics. Break any axiom and you are no longer using mathematics. Mathematics is defined and bounded by those axioms. It cannot operate outside them.
First, we define a zero as a void. That is one of the axioms.
Next, we define a one as a singular object. That is one of the axioms.
Next, we define an operator (also known as a binomial) call addition that can combine either of our two numbers and produce a number. This is an axiom.
Using just these three axioms, we can now define the number two, which is the result of addition of ONE and ONE. This is a proof, not an axiom.
Using what we have now, we can now define all positive numbers, by applying this proof repetitively (such as ONE and TWO produces three. We can also define multiplication as a repetitive addition.
At this point, we can prove the existence of all positive integers on the number line, up to an endless amount, which we can call infinity.
All this from just three axioms.
There are a few more, of course, defining such things as subtraction, allowing us to prove all negative numbers on the number line through proofs. That is also an axiom.
Another one is division, which (in the Real Math Domain), produces a thing we can call a fraction, or a number between integers, as produces a quotient only. That is also an axiom.
Thus, mathematics is closed. It cannot operate outside the axioms that define it and everything in it.
it is possible, however, to play a slightly different game, by adjusting one of the axioms. This creates a different Domain in mathematics, complete with a different kind of number line (or sometimes a number circle!). They have radically different characteristics, yet each is part of that overall thing we call mathematics. The system is still closed. Since there are a finite number of axioms, there is a finite number of Domains possible. What is taught in grade school and in college is the Real Math Domain. Occasionally, however, people find that it doesn't quite work as expected in the world they know. The world where we measure things, roll dice, how a random number is generated, or the way a computer is organized. These operate in a different math Domain, known as the Resolution Math Domain, also sometimes called the Full Discrete Math Domain or the Full Boolean Math Domain. In this domain, the number line looks quite different. It's actually a number circle. There is no infinity in that domain. There are no negative numbers or fractions in that domain either. All of this comes a result of adjust a single axiom defining division, and the introduction of a new axiom defining modulation.
The Resolution Domain is the world of the measuring device (even a simple ruler is locked into this Domain). We can so dome limited conversions between the two Domains, since they share so many common axioms, but it IS importing across Domains.
This domain is actually taught to 1st and sometimes as late as 2nd year grade school students. It is replaced with the Real Math Domain by the time they are in 3rd grade, and the former system is discarded for good. That's unfortunate. It has it's own unique powers. It governs things as they are in the real world, and does not deal with theoretical concepts like infinitely thin lines and infinitely smooth curves and infinitely small points that the Real Math Domain gets into.
These Domains are used by different people. You might say it's like a dialect. It's one of the biggest reasons why the layman doesn't quite trust the computer programmer, and why they do not quite trust the scientist or engineer. They are using different dialects of mathematics. Yes. It is quite possible to treat mathematics as a language. It is unique as a language, however, since it operates in a closed functional system.
An open functional system is simply one that does not have the kind of boundaries set by hard rules (axioms). Science is an open functional system. A theory of science can appear on any subject and for any reason. The only requirement is that the theory must be falsifiable.
Philosophy is an open functional system. The only requirement is that the arguments presented must be your own.
Logic is a closed functional system. Like mathematics, it follows a set of axioms. It cannot operate outside those axioms. Like mathematics, everything in logic can be described as an equation (though the symbols look different).
Just as it is possible to make an error in mathematics (by inadvertently breaking one of the rules, such as perform addition improperly (an arithmetic error), it is possible to make an error in logic in the same way. These are called fallacies. They render an argument null and void. To be a valid argument (logically), you must conform to the rules of logic. Anything else is gunk.
Here, I have given several new concepts, but they might help you to digest some of the last ones made, even though I'm sure they bring new questions into your mind just the same. Among them might be: "What constitutes a random number?" or "Why is a ruler locked into this thing called a Resolution Domain?".
Thank You. You very much dont see what I am seeing here, I see so much bad thinking and lack of any thinking only emoting which has been indoctrinated by the Victim Culture Cult, "I feel that....". I mean really, with the education such a wreck, with parents being of such low quality, with Christianity long along the road of dying how could it be otherwise? The mind does not magically know how to optimize, it takes practice and teaching and watching others who do it better....as civilization crashes the number of people who can be an example of quality crashes too, the two are solidly linked. As an Eastern Mystic it took years to even see how my ego was fucking with me, distorting my thinking, then it took over a decade to fix the problem, it is a lot of painful work to see clearly who we are, into our natures as we say in Zen. I see how few ever do such a thing these days, just look at how lazy and unevolved so many are. I am very sure that our ancestors generally did better quality thinking, even the illiterate ones.
Carlin got it:
BTW when I copy and paste it is almost always because I am lazy like Steve Jobs....I find it much easier to find text that says what I believe....usually done better than I could say it, than to write my own stuff. My aim is the ideas, this helps with the flushing out of ideas, this is efficiency. On all the forums I have been on this has not been appreciated, and is taken as an excuse to dismiss me and the ideas I bring. I carry on hoping that one day more will do it.
Into the Night
Contributor
Remember that what you see on the news is not representative of the population. Unfortunately, cut and pasting your way through life is no way to think for yourself.
I am a fucking heretic, I have been outside of the herd my entire life, I dont need any lectures on what thinking for myself means.
Into the Night
Contributor
If you are just cutting and pasting your arguments from others, you are part of the herd, despite what you say.
I am one of the Premier Free Mind/Free Speech advocates everywhere I go including here, I advertise that I am with the Truth Tellers Tribe and never lie, on my very first post here I advertised that I am a heretic.....
And I dont just cut and paste from others....we have had several conversations at length where I did not cut and paste at all.
You have completely failed to track.
Into the Night
Contributor
Not at all. I've enjoyed your conversations where you were presenting your own arguments. But you advocated the use of cut and paste as your arguments. That is simply not thinking for yourself when you do that. Cutting and pasting is using someone else's argument as your own. It fails to show any reasoning, since the reasoning for their argument and it's history is not included.
It is far better to present your own arguments. That IS philosophy. That IS what you have been doing with me. \
But now you try to justify the use of the arguments of others as thinking for yourself. It's not.
canceled.2021.3
Former Vice President
For one of the rare times I agree with Nazi Pelousy
canceled.2021.3
Former Vice President
I think Pelosi fears it will be uncontrolled, or rather he will be & will just stand there & lie his ass off~so why give him the stage to do so......
IMHO, as w/ all the debates-there obviously needs to be strict guidelines & moderator control........
Having entertainers moderating is good for ratings, not so much for moderation..........
The little man in orange will bitch "not fair to me" if he is not allowed to do or say whatever he wants whenever he wants to (as will the lemmings) so you need to have someone he can not intimidate or talk over..........
Each mic needs a fade to mute-simply your time is up, the mic fades out over ten secs-tuff shit if you weren't finished fuckin lying.............
Personally, unless they have someone that knows what they are doing, I won't watch it.......
Like the bull shit you had in the first Dem debates, what a fuckin fiasco that was.........
ROFLMAO
you guys are turning into North Koreans rallying to protect your physically inept leader Hiden Biden
So says the man that wants a one party state, ruled by one man........
So says the POS that, to make the claim he made, would have to be able to read minds.
You really should keep your nose in asses you are familiar w/........... No one is talking to the idiot section now, get back in your place before someone backhands you there....
I'm right where I belong. If you think I should be somewhere else, I want YOU to be the one to make the life altering mistake of trying to backhand me and put me where you think I should be. You'll shit your teeth.