Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Persecrates]

@Marabod:

Another useless and valueless rant.
I'm not complaining of being a vistim.
I never did consider myself as a victim and bnever will.
I simply point out that you have to resort to ad hominems and rants to hide the fact that you can't contradict 90% of the arguments I make. When you try, most of the time, you fail.

And if attacking QM is attacking you because you learnt it and had a diploma for it... Well, that's kind of a stretched definition of personnal attack you have there...

Now, for the ridiculous part (my arguments), it would be great you prove that... Other than laughing and claiming it I mean...

Anyway I developped enough non addressed (by you) arguments, logical demonstrations and facts on this subject already.

[Marabod]

@Marabod:

Another useless and valueless rant.
I'm not complaining of being a vistim.
I never did consider myself as a victim and bnever will.
I simply point out that you have to resort to ad hominems and rants to hide the fact that you can't contradict 90% of the arguments I make. When you try, most of the time, you fail.

And if attacking QM is attacking you because you learnt it and had a diploma for it... Well, that's kind of a stretched definition of personnal attack you have there...

Now, for the ridiculous part (my arguments), it would be great you prove that... Other than laughing and claiming it I mean...

Anyway I developped enough non addressed (by you) arguments, logical demonstrations and facts on this subject already.

There is little to "address" in you ignored "arguments"! I am not going to dispute with you over the existence of gravity! These disputes ended in 17th century already - so if you like to continue them, you need to call the spirits of the dead. Similar way, it would be pointless to dispute with you any other statement you make of this type; in fact it is impossible to dispute with you at all, as you are the one thinking that Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Physics are two different things! Try also stating that the Earth has a shape of a suitcase for this matter - I would also be not disputing this with you. There is plenty of artistic people in this world, I cannot dispute with any of their fantasies because it is too many of them! Yes, the Moon is made of cheese. Yes, Mathematics has no logic in it. Yes, God exists. Too many!...

All I was asking you was to express your personal views without insulting/offending those who naturally disagree with them. Including myself, whom you de-facto accused in a fraud, as I am selling my expertise to the paying Customers, and you are insisting my expertise is based on a false science. The money is involved here, this makes the issue sensitive. If you have some doubts in Quantum Physics - then just present your mathematical substantiation to these doubts, stop working with your tongue alone! Tongue is a boneless organ, it can literally produce any position/sound. Simply leave the Cat alone, prove that Schroedinger's EQUATION is false!

[Persecrates]

So, your conclusion is: there can be no debate about science, not philosophical, nor logical ones. None at all, in fact. Only mathematical demonstrations are possible...

Well, and here you are speaking about science in a PHYLOSOPHY forum.
You're also saying that the logic behind the mathematics (what are mathematics if a quantitative subset of Logic??) is only falsifiable/contradictable through maths.

Well, I totally disagree. The logic behind the maths can be proven false... Wait for it... LOGICALLY!

[Marabod]

So, your conclusion is: there can be no debate about science, not philosophical, nor logical ones. None at all, in fact. Only mathematical demonstrations are possible...

Well, and here you are speaking about science in a PHYLOSOPHY forum.
You're also saying that the logic behind the mathematics (what are mathematics if a quantitative subset of Logic??) is only falsifiable/contradictable through maths.

Well, I totally disagree. The logic behind the maths can be proven false... Wait for it... LOGICALLY!

Philosophy belongs to Science. Its role is to establish the approaches, the thinking algorithms used by the scientists. As such several Materialist Philosophies are a tool of Science, which it uses to operate within the Reality, separating Subjective from Objective, as this is what Science generally does.

Mathematics produces the theoretical concepts, using these very Philosophical tools; then the other branches of science again use the established approaches to test the mathematical concepts. This is all inter-connected, the individual branches do not exist by themselves. Math is a language of Science, in which all ideas are written. Mathematicians translate the Philosophers into scientific language.

Inability to understand how Science in general operates, causes to life the illusions that by amending some terminology or an approach one can affect the results of scientific actyivities - but this is wrong. If the approach in Philosophy, which you offer, is not fully rational or materialistic (this is easily determined!), then Science would automatically reject this approach, before it even make some effect. It is not all Philosophies which are connected to Science! Those currently utilised there are mostly the modern variations of Dialectical Materialism - not because science for some reason prefers some connection to Marxism, but because these philosophies were found as most productive in their generated approaches.

Therefore, any changes in WORDING of the philosophical approaches cannot take any effect until they are written in the language of Mathematics - and this is only possible with the Materialistic, rationalistic philosophical ideas, because mathematics is a language based on LOGIC, and Logic only operates with rational arguments. See what I mean? What you call "logical" has nothing to do with Logic until it is written as a formula!

Science is fool-proof exactly because of this feature! It only deals with something, which can be written in the language of Mathematics - this of course refers to the top sciences, the main ones, Physics and in some parts Chemistry. So-called "Applied Sciences" are less protected, but still greatly censored by the above two (plus Math and Philosophy). Thats why I was telling you from start that you were wasting your time talking about god or other crap like that - because it is impossible to present god in a mathematical form, and without this science won't even think about this god! It would not even understand what you are trying to say, because you are saying it NOT in the language science uses - with the same success someone could try to talk to you in Chinese. Duh!!!!!

[Youngfool]

Hello all:

If "Quantum Experiments Disprove Materialism", then what do they indeed prove? Perhaps they prove the existence of "something" I personally refer to as "God"?

In my understanding; and this is my understanding only: Your understanding could be quite different:

"God" is: infinite
"God" is: divine
"God" is: inexpressible
"God" is: incomprehensible
"God" is: intangible
"God" is: immutable
"God" is: caring
"God" is: creative
"God" is: love
"God" is: truth
"God" is: compassion
"God" is: forgiveness
"God" is: humility
"God" is: principle
"God" is: intelligence

As an aside: As these "seven spirits" express and manifest themselves through human mind; of course. Hence my personal conclusion that "mind" is just "God" and Nature's" i.e. "life's" way of manifesting itself.

Therefore if my premise is valid: "God" is "everything" and "nothing" at the same time. i.e. "absolute" or in my understanding: "ultimate reality" or "the ultimate source of all".

It is the unmanifest potential (nothing) that through which everything else - over the eons of time - became or has become "manifest".

And as this idea (it) has expressed and manifested itself at least through my mind, and yours also; simply by reading this post: Where does that leave us?

[Dr Jonathan Osterman PhD]

Hello all:

If "Quantum Experiments Disprove Materialism", then what do they indeed prove? Perhaps they prove the existence of "something" I personally refer to as "God"?

In my understanding; and this is my understanding only: Your understanding could be quite different:

"God" is: infinite
"God" is: divine
"God" is: inexpressible
"God" is: incomprehensible
"God" is: intangible
"God" is: immutable
"God" is: caring
"God" is: creative
"God" is: love
"God" is: truth
"God" is: compassion
"God" is: forgiveness
"God" is: humility
"God" is: principle
"God" is: intelligence

As an aside: As these "seven spirits" express and manifest themselves through human mind; of course. Hence my personal conclusion that "mind" is just "God" and Nature's" i.e. "life's" way of manifesting itself.

Therefore if my premise is valid: "God" is "everything" and "nothing" at the same time. i.e. "absolute" or in my understanding: "ultimate reality" or "the ultimate source of all".

It is the unmanifest potential (nothing) that through which everything else - over the eons of time - became or has become "manifest".

And as this idea (it) has expressed and manifested itself at least through my mind, and yours also; simply by reading this post: Where does that leave us?

Quantum Experiments Disprove materialism of the Darwinian random no-Evolution nonsense:

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2818&p=451372#p451372