Friday, June 27, 2008

Defintion of Science

Before we get anywhere in this blog I just thought I would lay down some essential groundwork.

This was a post i made about the definition of science and I thought it would be a good beginning to our journey into philosophy.

Here we go:

I was once asked a few very good questions about science.

It was a very deep conversation on a forum and I thought I'd share it with you :)


Originally Posted by (Name withheld)
1) What is non-science?

2)Is science better than non-science?

3)How many people must participate before non-science is considered science?
4)Can just one person "do science"?

5)Can science be wrong and still be science?

Answered in order of the questions

1 ) Non science is what the majority of world proclaimed experts deem to disproven explanations of the world.

2) Science has been non science, and vice versa, Neither is better than the other because the 2 frequently change sides, neither are static, but always shifting, everything is based on observations, and our observations are limited.

3) It depends who you ask, in a perfect world, the majority, but even in our world, you ask the minority and they say the majority is wrong.

4) One person can in his own heart, Examine the world, and come to his or her own conclusions.

Even if his conclusions are testable or not, that is not the point, being that testable conclusions in the past were proven wrong, given they were put on the wrong assumptions.

Is this single individuals science better or worse than anyone else's?

No, they are just his own views and observations.

5) Science has been wrong and still was science, Many times observations believed for Decades to be wrong have been proven right, and vice Versa.

Science, ultimately to me means the ABSOLUTE true observations of the natural world.

They do not need to be tested, as they are ABSOLUTELY true, and whether they are testable or not, does not help or hurt the theory or idea, because many Scientific findings of today were testably wrong before.


Here is the Dilemma:

We know nothing absolutely, but that there are no Absolutes.
We all start at assumptions, which can not be Absolutely proven.

We could all, be in some other dimension, in a dream like state, and our dreams could be connected, creating this world.

And when we die, we could wake up, and be in our TRUE bodies.

We ASSUME we are standing on earth, and we are in our true body, yet we cannot prove it.


Science is forever changing, forever tangible, yet it advances the way we grow and live.


Because when a majority of people bring their sciences together, and do research, hard, cold, and grueling research, we eventually gain some truths.

These truths, pieces of wisdoms, theories, and laws, have shaped our world.

But alas, it could all be in vein, and we could all be in one connected dream, the parameters of our world, plugged in, and we search a science, which are the mathematical algorithms that bring order to our connected dream.

Our true selves, blissfully arrogant of the Truth.

There are no truths, but the fact that there are no truths.

And for that, Science must remain, the ever faulty, ever shifting, majority opinion of the worlds denizens.

No comments:

Click Daily to Feed the Hungry