Conversation
Notices
-
@bichosan @dolus eh it was more like since sin just means going against God, the action of eating the fruit brought the concept of good and evil into the world, instead of it being there in the beginning and adam being silly and accidentally the fruit
there's a difference in nuance
as for two different types of fabrics, check your clothing labels. polyester and cotton? ur rekt lol
-
@bichosan @dolus religions will always exist in some form or another, you can't get rid of it at this point in human evolution
also, what /is/ reality? will we ever know or is it always viewed through a memetic lens of our experiences and beliefs
-
@bichosan @dolus faith necessarily implies a large degree of uncertainty. you accept taking a vaccination. but who knows what really is in the vaccine and if it still works. you're putting faith in the developers of the vaccine who says it works, the manufacturer who says they made it properly, the auditor who assures that the manufacturer made it properly, and the whole logistical system that got the vaccine to you who says they stored it properly during transit and it didn't go bad
what you view as "useless" is just because it mostly deals with the afterlife and hence doesn't really affect the current one that much
-
@bichosan @dolus personally i think that there was a certain non-negligible amount of time between "don't eat fruit" and "chomp", given enough time any event with nonzero probability will happen.
whether or not that was "planned", well, granting free will necessarily implies giving the chance for someone to do what you don't want them to do
>vaccination works under studies that prove those things works on a tested probability rate
you're still placing faith in the studies being legit and not compromised by the manufacturers
-
@bichosan @dolus ah, so you believe in predestination
-
@bichosan @dolus yeah what i'm saying is, you believe in those doing the testing that they are doing what they say they are doing
vaccines was just chosen because it was the first thing that came to mind. if you want we can change the example to "hole in the north pole/south pole" or "finland" instead
-
@bichosan @dolus how do you know the evidence wasn't falsified though
-
@bichosan @dolus does knowing everything necessarily mean you planned everything
if someone told you you'll end up killing your father and marrying your mother, does that mean you wanted to do that
-
@bichosan @dolus ok let's say through a deus ex machina you know completely for sure that it will happen. does that mean you planned to do that
-
@bichosan @dolus or, he might have made the creation first, then know the results after
since neither of the two possibilities are provable we'll just leave them to faith
-
@bichosan @dolus if some theory made it through peer review and becomes canon, then a few hundred years later someone debunks it, does that mean science is inconsistent
-
@bichosan @dolus >nothing is canon or perpetual
hindsight is in two years. if you lived before copernicus you'd never think earth not being the center of the universe might be a thing
but anyway, am i right to say your problem with religion includes
1. canon resists debunking
2. everything's metaphysical anyway so you can't really debunk anything in the first place
, and if (2) by some deus ex machina becomes resolved and (1) eventually capitulates you'd be okay with religion
-
@bichosan @dolus isn't religion to some extent an attempt to explain the metaphysical as well
it's just that most of it might or might not be misled at the moment because it's really hard to get accurate metaphysical scholarship and half of it was just made up, i.e. (2)
-
@bichosan @dolus you are making a heavy assumption that we are at the pinnacle of technology and knowledge today
people had flying palaces/chariots shooting "thunderbolts" in the vedas. pranic healing is still being purported to work, but it is outside the observable realm of physical science. what do you make of those then
it's like a blind person insisting color doesn't exist because he can't perceive them with his senses
-
@bichosan @dolus if african birth rates were still the same after introducing condoms to the community, are condoms just a placebo effect or do you blame the people for not knowing how to use them
i'm pretty sure those who actually know how to heal with metaphysics have a consistent success rate and the average rate was just being brought down by actual people who don't know what they're doing
-
@bichosan @dolus what if such research has already been done but was shut down at the peer review stage not due to inaccuracy
-
@bichosan @dolus you sure have a lot of faith in the peer review process not being compromised by bias huh
-
@bichosan @dolus how do you can't understand that if everyone on the peer review panel has bias they won't be aware of said bias while they exercise their gatekeeping power to shut out anything that goes against their narrative. the participants in the milgram experiment is not deliberately trying to cause grievous hurt either, doesn't mean they can't. that's why things are only published when they fit the narrative with a certain sigma and exposed for everyone to agree with. calling something a conspiracy is just an excuse to shut off your mind from the possibility of it happening
-
@dolus @bichosan apologies for the snowclone. but scientism is a religion too, just saying
-
@bichosan @dolus the "people who know the subject" only got there by agreeing with their predecessors back in the day when they were submitting their thesis. it's equally a dynasty of ideology if anything
have you wondered why there has been no progress in physics for the last hundred years? because everyone agreed dark matter is a thing and spent all their time with their heads in the sand trying to chase down evidence and making up increasingly absurd theories to prop up the dark matter theory
back to your example:
dude1: here is a paper showing confidence that i'm right
dude2, 3, 4, who are on the peer review panel: i have faith you're wrong
dude5: yeah what they said. rejected
dude1: dang
-
@bichosan @dolus scientism isn't scientology either. also, religion doesn't necessarily require a god figure
-
@dolus @bichosan sequel!
dude1: my paper has all the proper research though
dude6: yeah but did it pass peer review
dude1: no, dudes 2,3,4 rejected it, but—
dude6: well dudes 2,3,4 are established scientists, so they must be right. i have faith you're wrong
dude1: dang
-
@bichosan @dolus once again, you're still placing faith in the whole peer review system that the truth will always bubble to the top
ok yeah 100 years was a mistake, more like 50
well then, would you care to explain how galaxies rotate without being flung apart by centrifugal force then
-
@bichosan @dolus yes that happens too, but that doesn't mean my scenario doesn't also happen
-
@dolus @bichosan it's like saying someone took bribes but you jump out and defend him by going WELL HERE'S ALL THE TIMES WHEN HE DID HIS JOB PROPERLY
-
@dolus @bichosan https://freezepeach.xyz/attachment/91768
-
@bichosan @dolus well what i read was that gravitational attraction within the galaxy itself is not sufficient to keep the stars from flying out, but somehow it's still working
one side says that there are spooky "dark matter" to pad up the gravitational force deficit
the other side says that maybe electrical currents are a thing too
the first side calls the second a hack and a fraud and everyone believes them because they're the ones with credentials, given by the previous generation of people who believe in the same thing.
the search for "dark matter" continues
-
@bichosan @dolus well some people's goals are more like securing funding so they have money to live
the real amazing thing is how they've been smashing things in the LHC for a decade with no results and yet the corresponding things are still being passed as theory. "i-if we just use even higher power we'll get the particles we made up! really!"
-
@dolus @bichosan well heavy metals are poisonous but not when we put them in vaccines right
-
@kro @dolus @bichosan what's "high enough" depends on the compound though
1mg/kg of ricin doesn't get any less dangerous just because your analogy is "1mg/kg of table salt won't fuck you up for life because salt's LD50 is 3000mg/kg"
-
@bichosan @dolus my point isn't about the LHC being useless; other discoveries in quantum physics has no relation to why dark matter theory is still being propped up
*industries pay you to make up results favorable to their industry. remember how smoking and leaded gas was "revealed" to be healthy
-
@dolus henrietta lacks has been the victim of pharmaceutical science for 67 years
-
@dolus @bichosan whatever lad just get out of my face
-
@dolus they're cancer cells though so
-
@dolus basically whatever i posted so far
-
@bichosan @dolus most usually, the other side of that coin is "i only believe in the scientific method", and reject anything that can't be explained by said method
though actual adherents of the scientific method know there are things that are out of its scope, but no matter
-
@bichosan @dolus if you need to go to bed then by all means
the thread won't be going anywhere w
-
@bichosan @dolus >it tries to explain how gravity works among other things
more like, it tries to explain the discrepancies observed when people assume that gravity is the only force that works in interstellar levels
if "scientific testing" are used to convince people to buy things can't they be employed to convince people in other matters too
-
@bichosan @dolus and experimentation requires observation, which is not available in all cases.
can you observe someone thinking? no, only the electrical impulses in their brain and whatever output they give you as a response of that thinking
-
@dolus @bichosan oh saint niklaus is my favorite fate grand/order servant
-
@dolus @bichosan eh, not really
i haven't gotten that response since the last time i talked to dt, i think
-
@bichosan @dolus ok i'm going off track for the past few replies so i'm going to reconsolidate
my issue is twofold:
1. some things will never be explained physically
going way back to the healing example, let's say there was research done on this alternative healing method and it gives consistent results, and by a stroke of luck the peer review panel are all vulcanians or something and it passes peer review. next step as you said is to figure out how it works. but for some reason nobody can figure out the physical processes, and the healer insists it's just a combination of "two-pointing" and "time travel", whatever those might mean. people start to make up an entire branch of biology just to explain it, but experiments on that branch never bore any fruit. what do
2. scientists have a bias and gatekeep
going back to (1), except that the peer review panel are acclaimed medical doctors. to them the idea of "healing" without modern medicine is just some bullshit and they reject it regardless of the contained results. the auditor for the panel is also a medical doctor with the same bias and finds no wrongdoing. the public defaults to the authority of the doctors and believes the healing to be just some magick. this alternative form of healing never gets off the ground despite being able to give results, due to bad press. what do
-
@bichosan @dolus which brings back to my previous observation that your religion is scientism: of which one aspect is denying the possibility of anything undermining it (in this case, presence of bias and gatekeeping)
ok cheers!
-
@xj9 @dolus let us for example consider the synthesis of two separate ideas into a new thought
what part of it is physical? where are the original ideas stored? you can find specific electrical patterns in the hippocampus or something but how would you know those correspond to those two thoughts only and not an amalgamation of a whole bunch of other stuff
let's say you successfully claim to isolate the corresponding electrical patterns. now how did that new thought arise from these two ideas? just having the same two ideas shaped in the same pattern in a different brain doesn't necessarily result in the formation of the same thought. in the first place, is it spontaneous generation or did the brain cause the synthesis? can the brain make itself do this?..
after a certain point there's just so much going on that whatever you say is just a whole bunch of jumble that Isn't Even Wrong, or you just lose the train of thought of others and they think you're just doing some magic or something
"just let it rest for 50 years and let someone else look at it" what if nobody ever makes sense of it, ever? what then
-
@xj9 @dolus >if you remove or damage the brain, you can prevent these from occurring
that's where you're wrong kiddo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydranencephaly
-
@dolus @xj9 addendum: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18222607
-
@xj9 @dolus it's just a counterpoint of people without a brain still seemingly being able to function
another anecdote: https://www.quora.com/Has-anyone-been-born-without-a-brain/answer/Fabian-van-den-Berg
-
@xj9 @dolus that was only after becoming bedridden, maybe
-
@xj9 @dolus "well if you don't need a gun in your neighborhood you should give up the second amendment"
-
@xj9 @dolus your point was "you need brain to form thoughts"
mine was "here's an interesting example where person without brain appeared to have thoughts"
never said they were complex thoughts w
御園はくい
All Bobinas P4G content and data are available under the 