PDA

View Full Version : Homepage of BA



bigsplit
2007-Jan-25, 05:24 PM
Phil has an interesting introduction of himself on the BA homepage.

He writes:

"I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I like reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way."


I was wondering if Phil or someone else would explain this to me as I have some question.

What is the way reality is?


Is keeping it that way a philosophically and scientifically acceptable mindset for the advancement of knowledge?

Does skepticism violate its own tenants when it creates a reality and refuses to view it skeptically?

Just curious.

Johnny

hhEb09'1
2007-Jan-25, 06:20 PM
I was wondering if Phil or someone else would explain this to me as I have some question.First, that's an example of his wacky sense of humor.

What is the way reality is?One of the BIG questions. Not answered here.

Does skepticism violate its own tenants when it creates a reality and refuses to view it skeptically?I think you misunderstand. He's not saying that he likes what he created, he's saying that he likes what is. What that is, that's another BIG question, not answered here. :)

bigsplit
2007-Jan-25, 07:08 PM
First, that's an example of his wacky sense of humor.One of the BIG questions. Not answered here.I think you misunderstand. He's not saying that he likes what he created, he's saying that he likes what is. What that is, that's another BIG question, not answered here. :)


So he likes that reality is an unanswered Big Question and he hopes to keep it that way? I don't think that is what he means.

Argos
2007-Jan-25, 07:33 PM
Is it really that difficult? :)

He says he likes the bare and crude reality, without making it up, without unnecessary appendages, and he wants to keep facing it that way, bare and crude. It´s just another way to say he´s a positivist.

hhEb09'1
2007-Jan-25, 07:44 PM
So he likes that reality is an unanswered Big Question and he hopes to keep it that way? I don't think that is what he means.I know that's not what he means. :)

That's not what I said, either.

bigsplit
2007-Jan-25, 10:15 PM
Is it really that difficult? :)

He says he likes the bare and crude reality, without making it up, without unnecessary appendages, and he wants to keep facing it that way, bare and crude. It´s just another way to say he´s a positivist.

What is bare and crude about reality and why would he want to keep it that way?

Maybe our knowledge of reality is bare and crude, but reality is not the projections of human kind alone. If by positivist you mean he rejects magic, I can't argue with that in the least. At what point does the rejection of "unnecessary appendages" and the defining of such, pervert the pursuit of knowledge and science? At what point does the rejection of "appendages" result from established skepitical prejudices as opposed to the scientific method, the metaphysic of the postivist? How does the skeptic confront his established worldview from a positivist position and not fall down the slippery slope?

Argos
2007-Jan-25, 10:28 PM
Will you excuse me, Bigsplit, but I donīt think this is the right place for deep philosophical inquiries. I donīt have the answers. All I [as a positivist myself] know is that Occamīs razor must be used whenever necessary. With that said Iīm stepping out of this thread. ;)

The Bad Astronomer
2007-Jan-26, 12:43 AM
Reality is what it is. It's real. You don't have to make stuff up and pretend it's real, or scam people by telling them it's real.

Reality is. And that's the way it should be.

Sticks
2007-Jan-26, 02:17 PM
Reality is an illusion caused by the absence of Alcohol

The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy

:)

bigsplit
2007-Jan-29, 03:13 PM
Reality is what it is. It's real. You don't have to make stuff up and pretend it's real, or scam people by telling them it's real.

Reality is. And that's the way it should be.


The question is how do people Phil in the Gaps of what is known and not known through scientific method? It could be argued that we all fill in those gaps with something to establish a mindset with "unreal" filler if you will. How do positivist close these mindset gaps while staying true to their methodology?

Gillianren
2007-Jan-29, 08:54 PM
I thought we were all comfortable acknowledging there were things we don't know--that there are gaps.

WaxRubiks
2007-Jan-29, 09:30 PM
but there is no rule book that demands that all reality can be proved by science, is there?

bigsplit
2007-Jan-29, 09:52 PM
I thought we were all comfortable acknowledging there were things we don't know--that there are gaps.


Perhaps this is true. For instance, I do not know if there is a murderer outside my home at this moment. I am comfortable, because I see it as very unlikely. Some (very few I think) may be pulverized by such uncertainty to a greater or lesser degree and refuse to leave the house alone or unarmed or any other "paranoid' reasons.

This is certainly different than the mindset concept of uncertainty and its metaphysical implications, but there is a common concept of uncertainty.

bigsplit
2007-Jan-29, 09:55 PM
but there is no rule book that demands that all reality can be proved by science, is there?

Does positivism imply that all reality can be discovered through scientific method? I am not sure, and I would like to know what other's think. What does a positivist rely upon during times of heightened uncertainty when a decision must be made?

Gillianren
2007-Jan-30, 01:44 AM
Okay, perhaps I'd better clarify what I meant. What I meant is, there are gaps; we know this. We work to fill them. I did not mean we just let them go; I meant we are aware that they are there, we accept that they are there, and we work on improving our knowledge so that, eventually, they won't be there anymore.

PuckishOne
2007-Feb-06, 07:49 PM
Does skepticism violate its own tenants when it creates a reality and refuses to view it skeptically?

Violation of tenants? No one said anything about signing a lease...

Weighing in comfortably with the vive les gaps! contingent, also.