Philosophy Now Forum

Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

There is no "Why". "Why" is a human construct of attributing -meaning-, and "meaning" can essentially be described in terms of "how" (neuroscience).

That's the advantage of e-prime writing.

Without "to be," not much more than description remains.

E-prime writing and science are on the same frequency.

philosopher wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 5:43 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

There is no "Why". "Why" is a human construct of attributing -meaning-, and "meaning" can essentially be described in terms of "how" (neuroscience).

Exacty

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:41 pm That's the advantage of e-prime writing.

Without "to be," not much more than description remains.

E-prime writing and science are on the same frequency.

Not really.

Try it for awhile, and know.

Science studies cause and effect and strives for predictability. e-prime affects the language/thought relationship. Begin by observing the closest to consciousness; thought. First learn, then know the effects. Study the how. Gross thought can mask the subtle, although as folks learn, some effects upon mind turn into crossroads one cannot ignore. Come join us in e-prime. Come join us said the Sirens but the plan said no, no matter what.

Remember the purpose: preparation.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.



If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

No word can define 'what is', or every word defines 'it'. .

( IT ) is just another descriptive word for ( GOD )


In the beginning was the Word and Word was with God, and word was made flesh-

- the tangible world is from out the Breath-Word of God, the Breath of God -

Words flow directly from the Source Itself -

This world is the infinite expression in the tangible of Something Unseen





.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:35 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

No word can define 'what is', or every word defines 'it'. .
( IT ) is just another descriptive word for ( GOD )
In the beginning was the Word and Word was with God, and word was made flesh-
- the tangible world is from out the Breath-Word of God, the Breath of God -
Words flow directly from the Source Itself -
This world is the infinite expression in the tangible of Something Unseen

I took out the empty spaces between your texts, to see if it made more sense. But the content of the texts was the same as he empty spaces.

philosopher wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 5:43 pm There is no "Why". "Why" is a human construct of attributing -meaning-, and "meaning" can essentially be described in terms of "how" (neuroscience).

That's a reductionist mindset. Why and how are both human constructs.

WHY do you want to describe things in terms of HOW?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

Horseshit.

WHY do you want to know HOW things work?

If there was no "WHY" then WHY did we invent science?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Mar 19, 2021 11:26 am I took out the empty spaces between your texts, to see if it made more sense. But the content of the texts was the same as he empty spaces.

Very good work - job done Sculpture.

Notice one cannot take out the emptiness of space, for without space there are no objects. No space, no object, no objects, no space.

They are conjoined twins. They come together, like birds of a feather, as one whole package. That which is wholly whole, can never be made unwhole, no more than that which is spoken can never be unspoken.

Try again...see if you can really take me out!

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:09 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Mar 19, 2021 11:26 am I took out the empty spaces between your texts, to see if it made more sense. But the content of the texts was the same as he empty spaces.

Very good work - job done Sculpture.

Notice one cannot take out the emptiness of space, for without space there are no objects. No space, no object, no objects, no space.

You'd know about empty space , since that is what can be found in the place where your reason should reside.

They are conjoined twins. They come together, like birds of a feather, as one whole package. That which is wholly whole, can never be made unwhole, no more than that which is spoken can never be unspoken.

Try again...see if you can really take me out!

Yawn.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

we call this empiricism .

RIP Hume.

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Mar 28, 2021 7:28 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:46 am Science is descriptive. It has no answers, except more detailied descriptions, which are analogous to things we take for granted, and do not understand, but only experience. It offers descriptions of the familiar. It finds out "how" but there is no ultimate answer to "why". But science is the best we got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

If you want to know "why" ask a priest. He won't know, but it might help you, as it can sound like he does, if you have limited aspirations.

we call this empiricism .

RIP Hume.

It's still alive and well thankfully.
That's how we have cracked the COVID virus.
We've cracked it by describing its proteins and its genetic code. Having good desriptions of the immune system has led to understanding how introducing a modified virus to encourage antibodies.
We do not know WHY this has all happened, only HOW.