Originally Posted by Lazors
I'm arguing for using science as a lens of observation without giving it a monopoly on the things it's worse at explaining. What exactly it's bad at explaining is hard to define, because in my view it lies beyond the communication of words. Words is simply a model of understanding that fits the wide majority, but in terms of expressive power, it's very low on the scale. Maybe because the brain doesn't process words directly, but has to translate them into images. Don't know if this applies to more abstract thought.
I'm sure that as a friend of discourse you will hate the idea of having an argument over a concept that cannot be put into words. If you want to view it as a rhetorical trick or a flimsy thought with no argumentative value, that's ok. I know I'm being controversial and possibly very annoying.
Nonsense. That reads as 'I don't know how to explain what I'm thinking, so I'm just going to blame language'. What's holding you back isn't words being shit communicative tools, it's a lack of words. You need more words!
What science fails to explain is not hard to define, and it certainly does not lie beyond the capabilities of language. What you were trying to put into words, is that science does not (/should not) deal with abstract concepts - The domain of science is objective reality, truths.
I think that's the point you wanted to make, if I'm wrong tell me. On the point itself, I don't think science has a monopoly on abstractions at all (maybe you were just saying that it shouldn't, not that it does).
Originally Posted by xero901
I dunno man. I've traveled into hyperspace and saw a reptilian with a Pharaoh's head dress while in the middle of a pyramid. Was it my own imagination? Was it real? What dictates reality? Our senses? I had a complete ego death, warping all of my senses. Of time, presence, feeling, etc. If reality and clear evidence is dictated by the usage of our senses and logical thinking, would that not mean in the conscious state we possess during dreams, that they too are a part of reality?
That's why I make the inference that all of it is a dream projected at us through our senses
Your senses do not dictate reality. They dictate your experience of reality, but they do not dictate reality. Reality exists independent of your senses (reality existed before you were born and will continue to exist after you die). This sort of thinking is dangerously close to solipsism.
You remind me of a uni mate I still occasionally interact with on Facebook. He's big into his psychedelics too and quotes ol' Terence like any good modern hippy. Every now and again I gotta bring him back down to Earth.
There's something to be said for having an open mind, but open it up too far and all sorts of weird shit starts leaking in. Don't view this as me attacking you, view it as me genuinely trying to help you.
Last edited by Ele; Jul 6, 2017 at 04:02 PM.
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»