Philosophy Now Forum

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.

According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".

I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.

The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.

But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.

According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".

I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.

The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.

But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.

-1- wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:26 am Have you ever heard of social sciences? Psychology, sociology, cultural anthropology, history, literature?

You have a pretty skewed sense of reality. I'm not going to argue, you have all the right as an individual to hold your views. But if you opened your mind up just a bit, you'd see that reality is not as you imagine it.

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pmThe scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pmBut this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING.

uwot wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2019 5:16 pm Check out this forum, at least half the contributors jump straight to 'meaning' with no idea about facts.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:41 am

uwot wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2019 5:16 pm Check out this forum, at least half the contributors jump straight to 'meaning' with no idea about facts.

Well... what do you mean by "facts" ?

uwot wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:01 am Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:13 am

uwot wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:01 am Empirical evidence, me old china. Ya only hafta read some of the guff that is written.

The standards for "evidence" are ambiguous across different scientific disciplines to say the least.

Logik wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:13 amSome admit more noise than signal. This xkcd comes to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/

philosopher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:14 pm Faith (ie. religious faith) tries to answer the meaning of everything.
Science tries to answer the workings of everything.

According to the Scientistic view, there is no meaning because everything just "is".

I find this bold statement as meaningless as saying there is no story in a movie, because the movie is - after all - just pixels moving on a screen.

The scientists may reverse-engineer the movie and find out how they did the visual effects and how the cameras works. And even how the manuscript was written, and they can even tell us about the detailed workings in the brain of those who wrote the manuscript in the first place, in terms of neurons sending and recieving chemicals and electrical signals between the synapses.

But this explanation regardless of how detailed it is, still does not do away with MEANING. Viewed from a holistic perspective, that is to say to look at the system (electrical synapses and chemicals in the brain) as an entity in and of itself, the concept of meaning becomes meaningful, because the system itself feels and have emotions - as you clearly feel that way as you readers are composed of these systems yourself. Including those with Scientistic world views.