Re:A Jesuit Pope -- this could be very interesting
on
New Pope Selected
·
· Score: 1
.. and, in particular, god is not falsifiable.
And that was precisely my point; your original question asked the OP to test God as an hypothesis, which you recognize is absurd.
God is an axiom, exactly like the idea that science can work at all. You can collect evidence supporting them, but not disproving them.
Re:A Jesuit Pope -- this could be very interesting
on
New Pope Selected
·
· Score: 1
So, what am I missing? How is it rational to prove the validity of science through science?
Re:A Jesuit Pope -- this could be very interesting
on
New Pope Selected
·
· Score: 1
What? You are assuming science and religion are the same kinds of things.
Not exactly. I'm assuming "the belief that science can describe an objective, external world" and "the belief that an objective, external world exists at all" are the same kind of "the belief that God exist".
True, science is a method to study the external world; but you can also see religion as a method to study emotions and human relations. You can use religion to make assertions about reality in the same way that you can use science to make moral judgements - which is, by stretching the method outside of their area of validity.
Being beliefs, neither can be proven nor disproven merely by logic alone; beliefs are ultimately based on emotion, not reason. In that level, yes, they're the same kind of thing. I may believe that science is a better method to learn about existence, and I may even believe that it's incompatible with religion, but I can't prove it scientifically; that would be an infinite recursion.
Re:A Jesuit Pope -- this could be very interesting
on
New Pope Selected
·
· Score: 1
Solipsism. We're talking metaphysics here, you're not even playing the right game.
Do you realize that science relies on logic, logic relies on sets of axioms, and axioms can't be disproved by empirical evidence, only by inconsistencies in the formal system? The existence of $DEITY$ can't be proven nor disproven by empiric data, because it's a logically consistent system. How would you disprove that the COBE prediction is proof of the Will of God?
(FYI I'm an atheist, but in my day I did my duty learning a bit about philosophy of science. I know science's limits, and while I know where my axioms lay, I recognize what happens when you change your axioms starting from a different belief system).
Re:A Jesuit Pope -- this could be very interesting
on
New Pope Selected
·
· Score: 1
How did you test that hypothesis?
The same way you tested the hypothesis that empirical methods can discover regular, universal laws; and with equivalent results.
The only thing stopping people from using LaTeX for business documents is the lack of template libraries
Which proves my point. Building new LaTeX templates from scratch is nightmarishly difficult, so "just having someone to write them up" is something only 0.001 companies in the world could afford.
Meanwhile, having a graphics designer to build a few templates in MS Word is quite straightforward, so the in-house locked-down template approach is much more practical.
I agree to some degree. HTML is not good for doing exact visuals, but it's still great for delivering content to a myriad of different platforms and devices.
The only error is in trying to make it pixel-perfect.
That's because HTML is a semantic language, not a visual language. A designer would work against the languages purpose, and only serve for limited purposes. (There are *lots* of HTML designers that work "as well as Win32" for limited purposes, btw.)
What do you mean, that kickbacks and loopholes are not part of "how money works"? Sorry to bust your bubble, but the world doesn't actually work as a Randian utopia.
If it applies to innocents as well as the guilty, taking a deal is completely irrelevant and unrelated to actual guiltiness. Thus, you can't use the number of deals as measure to estimate that a majority is guilty.
It makes you wonder if we technicians aren't creating a new class of 'codeless' people -like the 'homeless'- those who fall through the gaps of the system, in this case because they have their digital ID revoked. They wouldn't have a way to get in the system again, because lacking an identification they wouldn't be able to use even the basic communication tools.
I can't believe none at Slashdot knows the hilarious 2D Goggles a.k.a. The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage, a geekish steampunk in which Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage have actually built an analytical engine and use it to fight crime! (sort of).
It's more a one-day experiment running amok than a webcomic, as the update pace leaves us waiting for months, but what's already written definitely warrants reading it.
The only objective fact is that at the heat death of the universe, nothing matters. For everything else until that moment, human opinions are important; so I don't mind having a few subjective beliefs in consideration to some degree, even if they're biased toward my fellow humans.
The idea that we need the EU to be civilized democracies is rather absurd
Given our millennium-long history, we know that in Europe we need it to be civilized democracies. (This is how the Greeks managed to get along too, BTW).
Slashdot Mirror
And that was precisely my point; your original question asked the OP to test God as an hypothesis, which you recognize is absurd.
God is an axiom, exactly like the idea that science can work at all. You can collect evidence supporting them, but not disproving them.
So, what am I missing? How is it rational to prove the validity of science through science?
Not exactly. I'm assuming "the belief that science can describe an objective, external world" and "the belief that an objective, external world exists at all" are the same kind of "the belief that God exist".
True, science is a method to study the external world; but you can also see religion as a method to study emotions and human relations. You can use religion to make assertions about reality in the same way that you can use science to make moral judgements - which is, by stretching the method outside of their area of validity.
Being beliefs, neither can be proven nor disproven merely by logic alone; beliefs are ultimately based on emotion, not reason. In that level, yes, they're the same kind of thing. I may believe that science is a better method to learn about existence, and I may even believe that it's incompatible with religion, but I can't prove it scientifically; that would be an infinite recursion.
Solipsism. We're talking metaphysics here, you're not even playing the right game.
Do you realize that science relies on logic, logic relies on sets of axioms, and axioms can't be disproved by empirical evidence, only by inconsistencies in the formal system? The existence of $DEITY$ can't be proven nor disproven by empiric data, because it's a logically consistent system. How would you disprove that the COBE prediction is proof of the Will of God?
(FYI I'm an atheist, but in my day I did my duty learning a bit about philosophy of science. I know science's limits, and while I know where my axioms lay, I recognize what happens when you change your axioms starting from a different belief system).
The same way you tested the hypothesis that empirical methods can discover regular, universal laws; and with equivalent results.
Which proves my point. Building new LaTeX templates from scratch is nightmarishly difficult, so "just having someone to write them up" is something only 0.001 companies in the world could afford.
Meanwhile, having a graphics designer to build a few templates in MS Word is quite straightforward, so the in-house locked-down template approach is much more practical.
Next thing you know, they'll be battling with the stigma and guilt.
I agree to some degree. HTML is not good for doing exact visuals, but it's still great for delivering content to a myriad of different platforms and devices.
The only error is in trying to make it pixel-perfect.
Oh yeah? How do you create professional business looking documents with LaTeX, ones that don't look like thesis dissertations?
I for one welcome our ninja-trained helicopter-piloting rat underlords.
That's because HTML is a semantic language, not a visual language. A designer would work against the languages purpose, and only serve for limited purposes. (There are *lots* of HTML designers that work "as well as Win32" for limited purposes, btw.)
What do you mean, that kickbacks and loopholes are not part of "how money works"? Sorry to bust your bubble, but the world doesn't actually work as a Randian utopia.
Why the "if"? /. allows you to do just that.
S.H.I.E.L.D. technology released to the general public.
Finally, S.H.I.E.L.D. technology released to the general public.
If it applies to innocents as well as the guilty, taking a deal is completely irrelevant and unrelated to actual guiltiness. Thus, you can't use the number of deals as measure to estimate that a majority is guilty.
It makes you wonder if we technicians aren't creating a new class of 'codeless' people -like the 'homeless'- those who fall through the gaps of the system, in this case because they have their digital ID revoked. They wouldn't have a way to get in the system again, because lacking an identification they wouldn't be able to use even the basic communication tools.
I can't believe none at Slashdot knows the hilarious 2D Goggles a.k.a. The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage, a geekish steampunk in which Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage have actually built an analytical engine and use it to fight crime! (sort of).
It's more a one-day experiment running amok than a webcomic, as the update pace leaves us waiting for months, but what's already written definitely warrants reading it.
The only objective fact is that at the heat death of the universe, nothing matters. For everything else until that moment, human opinions are important; so I don't mind having a few subjective beliefs in consideration to some degree, even if they're biased toward my fellow humans.
Given our millennium-long history, we know that in Europe we need it to be civilized democracies. (This is how the Greeks managed to get along too, BTW).
"...we'll only RENT them for the duration of an ad campaign".
Fuck you and your baseless assertions.
This post costed /. an extra $0.10.
Then they'll begin placing captchas in their advertisements, to ensure that you've read the ad before providing the real content.
And then developers will add OCR to AdBlock...
Why do you find disturbing that people can use computers without devoting their lives to learning them?
Wait I know the answer, it's because it disrupts the livelihood of the priests guarding the arcane knowledge.
May I add, "as long as you have users that like your design and you keep listening to them to further tweak it".