What is to be gained by denying science?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Ormond »

Guys,

You're right, the link I provided above was sloppy. Here's a corrected version. Everything you want to know can be found here:

http://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/ ... 12&t=14465

Next, if you require personal assistance you might ask Steve the Scientist, a friendly helpful fellow. He understands the thread, perhaps because he read it. You know those scientists, they're always doing crazy advanced stuff like that.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Steve3007 »

I think Iapetus has got some good points there, Ormond. Bienvenue Iapetus.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Ormond:
You're right, the link I provided above was sloppy. Here's a corrected version. Everything you want to know can be found here:

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=14465
This brings us to page one of this thread.

Why play these games? If what we have responded to is not your theory then repost the theory not a link. If it is the theory then respond to our comments on it.

Early on you predicted that everyone will run off, but you are the one who is running off by playing games and refusing to respond to us.
User avatar
Ormond
Posts: 932
Joined: December 30th, 2015, 8:14 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Ormond »

Well, as I attempted to say above...

If you Steve the Science Guy feel recent posters have read the thread, understand the discussion, and have made useful contributions to it, feel free to respond to their points in whatever manner you find to be appropriate. I don't object at all. I'm just limiting my own engagement, not anyone else's.
If the things we want to hear could take us where we want to go, we'd already be there.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Steve3007 »

Regardless of what we might think of it, I think it's fairly clear what Ormond's theory is. It is that sooner or later the capacity for more and more dramatic feats of construction and destruction will inevitably result in a single act of destruction which will prevent any future significant acts of either kind.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Steve3007:
Regardless of what we might think of it, I think it's fairly clear what Ormond's theory is. It is that sooner or later the capacity for more and more dramatic feats of construction and destruction will inevitably result in a single act of destruction which will prevent any future significant acts of either kind.
In that case we have addressed his theory. It is then inexplicable why he repeatedly insists that we have not.

I do not, however, think he is claiming that it is inevitable, but rather that the risk increases as knowledge progresses uncontrollably.

And yet, he has not shown that the continued advancement of knowledge is the problem. Instead, he keeps pointing to nuclear weapons:
Nuclear weapons are the most pressing threat at the moment.


While I, along with most people, agree that this is a problem, as I pointed out, the technology has been around for seventy years. And so, we cannot blame the increase in knowledge in the last seventy years for this problem. If increase in knowledge were the problem, in that time frame we would expect to find many more and much more serious threats.

-- Updated February 12th, 2017, 7:24 pm to add the following --

Ormond:
Well, as I attempted to say above...

If you Steve the Science Guy feel recent posters have read the thread, understand the discussion, and have made useful contributions to it, feel free to respond to their points in whatever manner you find to be appropriate. I don't object at all. I'm just limiting my own engagement, not anyone else's.
That’s fine, but if that is what you choose to do then drop the pretense of being the lone voice, standing against various forums across the internet for the last twenty years, with no one able to show where you are wrong and their being unable to do so running away.

You accuse us of not reading the topic and yet if you had done what you tell others to do you would know that he has been responding to our posts.

Since you are listening to Steve, pay close attention to what he says about ego in post #80.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Steve3007 »

Steve the Scientist ... Steve the Science Guy
I always feel a bit uneasy with things like this. The little company in which I work is roughly divided into the Production department (which makes the products) and the Engineering department (which invents new products for the Production department to make). The head of the Production department frequently tells the Engineering department what clever thinking-outside-the-box type geniuses they, unlike the Production guys who are simple souls who have to be given clear instructions. Maybe I'm overly suspicious, but it always seems to be paving the way, if the Engineers fall short, for saying "Pah! Call yourselves geniuses!".

Anyway, I'll put away my disingenuous suspicions and try to live up to the billing.

Fooloso4:
While I, along with most people, agree that this is a problem, as I pointed out, the technology has been around for seventy years. And so, we cannot blame the increase in knowledge in the last seventy years for this problem. If increase in knowledge were the problem, in that time frame we would expect to find many more and much more serious threats.
Yes, it's been a while since the Cuban Missile Crisis and since then, as Ormond has pointed out, there have been quite a few close shaves. Perhaps it would be a good idea to turn this to our advantage and analyse those close shaves to see why they didn't result in disaster. Maybe we'll find some evidence that human nature is much more robust at preventing disaster than we thought it was, and that we probably can actually survive for a long time with the threat of disaster hanging over us. I guess that would be good. Or maybe we'll find that we've just been lucky and that we've spent the last 60-odd years playing Russian Roulette, pulling the trigger once every few years with that single bullet slowly moving round towards the barrel. Not so good.

Anyway, taking the long view, and shifting the emphasis away from this nebulous general concept of "knowledge", which appears to be problematic, I think there is a case to be made for the idea that it isn't just nuclear weapons that we should be concerned about. It seems reasonable to suppose that human ingenuity will come up with other completely new mechanisms for weapons of mass destruction in the future. So, even though, like most people here, I can't see any obvious way to stop that, I do recognise it as an issue worth thinking about. It's difficult to think about because we have no way of knowing what exactly those new mechanisms might be. I presume that's why Ormond falls back on this general abstract concept of "knowledge".

Maybe a lot of people will say that if we have no way of knowing what new mechanisms for destructive power we might discover in the future then there's no point in trying to discuss the subject. Perhaps that would be true in any context other than philosophy.

Gotta stop this rambling now and do work. Hopefully civilisation won't end before I come back. That would be a pity.
Iapetus
Posts: 402
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 6:41 pm
Location: Strasbourg, France

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Iapetus »

Reply to Ormond:
Guys,

You're right, the link I provided above was sloppy. Here's a corrected version. Everything you want to know can be found here:

l viewtopic.php?f=12&t=14465 l

Next, if you require personal assistance you might ask Steve the Scientist, a friendly helpful fellow. He understands the thread, perhaps because he read it. You know those scientists, they're always doing crazy advanced stuff like that.
Ormond, you are wasting our time. We have asked you about your ‘theory’ and you are unable to tell us anything. Your first link was faulty. This time you direct us to the first page of this thread, which has contributions from Andrian, Renee, Greta, Ozymandias, Spiral Out, Lucky R and Felix but not a single word from you. Not one word.

You don’t have a theory. You have made some observations without explanation and, when challenged about these, you have avoided answering – particularly by directing us to the false dichotomy of ‘accepting’ or ‘rejecting’ a non-existent theory – or tried to redirect us elsewhere. Steve is perfectly capable of presenting his own views; please don’t insult us by expecting him to speak for you as well.

You seem, sometimes, to think of yourself as a lone voice of reason. If that were the case then, surely, you would have been more willing to engage in discussion. Yet, for my part, I have come to expect a non-response. It is systematic and, if you wish, I can certainly quote you examples.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Steve3007 »

I had a quick look back at the start of the topic. The first page seems to be mostly Spiral Out moaning about how if we didn't spend so much money on particle colliders and trips to Mars we'd spend it all on curing cancer and housing the homeless. (I see no evidence to suggest that is true.)

The theme that has dominated the most recent pages appears to get started around page 2. So pretty early.

-- Updated Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:04 pm to add the following --

Ormond, I noticed this post on page 4:

onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtop ... 86#p283486

and don't remember ever seeing it before. So I suspect you're right that something odd is happening to your posts. Some of them seem to be delayed and some presumably don't appear at all.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: What is to be gained by denying science?

Post by Fooloso4 »

Steve3007:
… this nebulous general concept of "knowledge" …
I would add, the nebulous general concept of “science”. Some seem to be of the impression that a scientist knows science, as if it were one thing. It has been a long time since anyone has had a grasp of science as a whole. The sciences are diverse. A botanist might not know any more about chemistry or physics than anyone who has taken chemistry or physics in college. A physical chemist may not be well versed in organic chemistry unless she is a physical organic chemist, but may be unable to read a journal of theoretical physics. It gets even more fine grained and specialized. The biochemist, the polymer chemist, and the nuclear chemist cannot just move from one to the other because they all are chemists let alone scientists.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021