User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 88

  1. #21
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I suspect is refers to a history of science degree/background, but would need to know more about his university and department to be sure. When I was in school, a course entitled "Islamic science" would have been about that.

    The real value in any religious accounts is metaphorical. Unfortunately some people think they must be able to claim historical/factual accuracy for the stories to have any worth, and that debunking the veracity on this level debunks or insults the entire faith. Not at all so, just those who want to interpret things literally. The better answer to "is this story from your holy book factually correct" is "it doesn't matter; the moral or lesson is independent of that".


    I am participating in a public thread, like anyone else. I am not going to refrain from posting in threads just because you are doing so also. If you are so intent in ignoring me, it might help if you actually do it.
    I ask you to stop harassing me.

    And I would be happy to put you on Ignore if you would resign from your post as Moderator.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Israeli archeologists have determined their were no Jews in Egypt at the time of the Pharoh, and that there was no Exodus, and so no crossing of the Red Sea.

    We now know it didn't happen.
    I vaguely remember you telling me this in another thread now. Might you refresh my memory on how they arrived at this conclusion?

  3. #23
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Science has no authority apart from religion.

    The authority of science stems not merely from the ability to make observation, but from being able to predict the future based on those observations. Such predictions rely most fundamentally on an unprovable presupposition and doctrine of uniformity of nature apart from which it's impossible to predict anything. Christianity in particular can account for such a belief. The atheistic materialist cannot account for this and yet persists in their own logical inconsistency.
    Oh please! Of course we can prove the laws of nature are uniform.

    The method of proof is called induction. And it is the method of proof used in almost all of science.

    We can induce, to a point of certainty, that the laws of nature are uniform, without positing a supernatural being.

  4. #24
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I vaguely remember you telling me this in another thread now. Might you refresh my memory on how they arrived at this conclusion?
    You would need to ask the Israeli archeologists.

    It was published in the peer review journal and in the newspapers at the time.

    And is now accepted by almost all Israeli archeologists and archeologists at large.

    And of course it was brave for Israeli archeologists from an Israeli university to publish their findings in Israel. And it is a tribute to their integrity.

  5. #25
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garbage View Post
    It helps to actually define what Islamic Science is.

    It's about the origins of science from the perspective of early Islam (and Islamic philosophers), as a contribution to the field of religious studies overall. It's not about attempting to seize a part of science and label it Islamic.

    So, it's not about theft of science. In fact, it's exactly the opposite. It's about how Islam developed its own perspectives on science and shared them with the world at large.
    Actually we know what is taught as Islamic Science and it is the science of the Koran.

    Of course for Islam the Koran is word of Allah and is scientifically correct, while the rest of us know that that the Koran is not a scientific text.

    Just ask yourself how many Islamic scholars with a doctorate in Islamic Science have won a Nobel Prize for Science.

  6. #26
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Oh please! Of course we can prove the laws of nature are uniform.

    The method of proof is called induction. And it is the method of proof used in almost all of science.

    We can induce, to a point of certainty, that the laws of nature are uniform, without positing a supernatural being.
    You cannot induce the uniformity of nature without utilizing circular logic. First you must presuppose that the laws of nature are uniform then you may induce things from observation.

    But, from where does that presupposition come?

  7. #27
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    You cannot induce the uniformity of nature without utilizing circular logic. First you must presuppose that the laws of nature are uniform then you may induce things from observation.

    But, from where does that presupposition come?
    No, no my dear Beorn, I understand you believe three impossible things before breakfast, and so like a drowning man you clutch at straws, to justify your impossible beliefs.

    And so your first move is to confuse deductive and inductive reasoning.

    And it's a good move because we can't deduce the laws of nature are uniform, however we can induce the laws of nature are uniform to a degree of certainty.

    So we have no presupposition that the laws of nature are uniform, rather we have overwhelming evidence that enables us to induce that the laws of nature are uniform.

    And induction is part of the scientific method.

  8. #28
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    No, no my dear Beorn, I understand you believe three impossible things before breakfast, and so like a drowning man you clutch at straws, to justify your impossible beliefs.

    And so your first move is to confuse deductive and inductive reasoning.
    I believe it's you that is confusing deductive and inductive reasoning.

    Deductive reasoning is self-verifying utilizing the laws of logic.

    Inductive reasoning requires both the laws of logic and an independent presupposition about the nature of the universe.


    however we can induce the laws of nature are uniform to a degree of certainty.
    What do you mean by certainty?

    So we have no presupposition that the laws of nature are uniform, rather we have overwhelming evidence that enables us to induce that the laws of nature are uniform.

    And induction is part of the scientific method.
    The fact that induction works and that nature is uniform, both of which I believe, is irrelevant to HOW induction works and the philosophical reality of it's functioning.

  9. #29
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Yes, you are quite right. Science is based on evidence and reason coming out of the European Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries.

    And science has been so successful it has shaped our modern world. So science has immense kudos. And it is this kudos the different religions covert and steal.
    You're wrong about that part, as the religions are trying for different things; predate science; and provided the philosophical/metaphysical underpinnings for scientific inquiry.
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  10. #30
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    I believe it's you that is confusing deductive and inductive reasoning.

    Deductive reasoning is self-verifying utilizing the laws of logic.

    Inductive reasoning requires both the laws of logic and an independent presupposition about the nature of the universe.

    What do you mean by certainty?

    The fact that induction works and that nature is uniform, both of which I believe, is irrelevant to HOW induction works and the philosophical reality of it's functioning.
    Of course it is an interesting question as to how induction works.

    And it is based on statistics and probability.

    And you are right about deductive reasoning, while inductive reasoning requires empirical evidence and reason, usually in the form of statistics.

    Where we differ is that I know deductive reasoning without empirical evidence leads to absurdity, whereas you believe deductive reasoning based on an apriori supposition leads to the Truth.

    So perhaps we can say you believe in the Truth with a capital T, while I believe in the truth with a small t.

Similar Threads

  1. Sciencebucks.com, the kickstarter of science funding?
    By ygolo in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-27-2012, 01:48 PM
  2. the Pinnacle of Science Fiction
    By Kingfisher in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-17-2010, 07:32 PM
  3. [NT] Worshiping at the altar of science.
    By ObeyBunny in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-09-2010, 02:02 AM
  4. Informal Discussion on the Philosophy of Science
    By ygolo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-24-2008, 12:23 PM
  5. What is the purpose of Science Fiction?
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 06:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO