Connecting Philosophy and Science

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by popsthebuilder, Jun 25, 2015.

  1. Ok does any one know why science cannot define true correct philosophy?



    Here is another.

    Can true philosophy completely explain science?



    How bout this no brainer.

    Is science knowledge?



    One last question before I begin to explain myself.

    Is everything energy, either stored or whats the word... active?



    Now what the heck am I talking about... true philosophy. Bare with me and excuse the shitty language skills. Philosophy in the way that I will be talking about is general. Much is even metaphorical. So according to old text there were these first people right? Adam and Eve. They were able to enjoy a lot of things because they had free will or the ability to think. A marvelous gift indeed. God only asked that they didn't do one thing. Something about eating some special fruit or something right? Wasn't it referred to as the fruit of knowledge. So they had free will to do almost whatever they wanted and experience life for the beauty and majesty that it is. So God created all these wonderful things with nothing to really appreciate it or experience it on a real level, or benefit from it past just living, except for man. The Lord warned them of the fruit of knowledge for there own good but they couldn't understand why. After much thought and because of the other side of free will· temptation they eventually partook of the fruit of knowledge. Now the reason that the Lord didn't want them to experience that particular thing was because even though they wouldn't be able to tell because of inherent evil, that particular knowledge had the potential to destroy there opportunity at experiencing life as he had deemed fit. A life without pain if you will. A beautiful life. It also had the ability to destroy life completely. We were tempted and did eat because of a negativity that is part of us. An energy.



    So science can and does fall in to place just right within philosophy. In fact it is a major part of it. It is an extra ordinary observational tool that just so happens to dissect, kill, or otherwise expel everything that we use it for. Science is a way of undoing with the pretence that usable knowledge will be obtained. It is indeed a very powerful tool of destruction. So science has the ability to not only wipe us from creation, nullify the beauty of all creation and perhaps nullify all of creation itself. This seams very negative. Well if people were completely understanding of these facts of science or didn't know of science at all then we would be a ok. But evil lurks in us all and we can be easily blinded by science itself and other motives.



    So philosophy encompasses science wholly.



    We have good and evil in all of us. It can be seen as positive and negative. Why? Because everything including atoms seem to be some combination of positive and negative energy if you will allow that. So is everything energy either positive, negative, or some yet explained by science that is akin to chaos or disorder?



    So science is a knowledge that can and has led us astray along with all sorts of other societal norms. We all had and have a chance to change our fate as one living thing. Positive and negative and chaos are the ways of everything in our Universe that we are directly linked to without science. We can understand this without the use of science. The more positive, good, rightious, things we do will have a lasting impact as will the negative evil things and the indifference or lack of action. We can indeed know everything we need to know without science. It is but a useful tool and only that when used by people with a wide understanding of reality without dissecting it.



    By the way things usually die when you take them apart..



    Sorry for any rambling unclear statements. I will do my best to clarify anything I can. Really difficult to post something this big on a phone.



    Sent from my C6730 using Tapatalk

    Sent from my C6730 using Tapatalk
     
  2. I believe it was the fruit of knowledge of good and evil. I believe it has to do with duality. We went from a non-dual state of consciousness where we were unaffected by ideas of good and evil and went into these ideas of good and evil, creating a divide that would cause us to live in a chaotic and arbitrary battle for aeons. We went down a step in consciousness after eating that fruit, that knowledge made us less of a active creative force and more of a passive affected force.
     
  3. How is this about science?
     
  4. Im seeing two seperate ideas in this thread, loosely connected. One about science and philosophy, one about good and evil.

    Yes science and philosophy are connected, science is a branch of epistemology which is a branch of philosophy.

    There is a lot of various information on the good and evil/garden of eden event. The Bible paints Yahweh as the good guy and serpent as the bad guy, whereas the gnostics had it the other way around. So 'eating of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil' wasnt a rebellious mishap, but part of the plan/purpose. Being made in the image of God was clearly not a literal physical image, but perhaps a metaphorical likeness of Gods freewill. In order to experience this dichotomy, in was a necessary act. John Allegro, who as i think the only nonreligious person to be allowed to translate some of the dead sea scrolls, came to the conclusion that much of the true meaning behind the bible was hidden in allegorical stories etc. Well i wont butcher what he says, here is a site i just looked up (just browsed a bit) assuming it has similar information to what i am saying.

    Im not claiming its true, but it is another way to look at it.

    www.egodeath.com/wassonedentree.htm#_Toc135889182
     
  5. This new forum thing is annoying. I can't even quote people. Also, I didn't really read the thread thing, theere were weird symbols and shit. Also I've been high as fuck lately.
     
  6. It isnt just you being high as fuck, its gone a bit bonkers since maintenance.
     
  7. You are high as fuck :) Teach me
     
  8. Do you think that science could in a way also be considered a belief system i.e the belief that the scientific method is the key to truth? Yes science relies heavily on empirical evidence but the very method that it uses to come to this empirical evidence is what I'm questioning. I.e are numbers in and of themselves empirically valid what reason would one give for believing that this is so?
     
  9. Science is a belief system... Just like every religion. and if you grasp the idea of belief systems, then philosophy would fall there too. Depending on how you look at science, you will need to philosophize regardless.
    Which you would get the philosophy of science we continued to the next level.


    I don't think you should use Christianity as your sole example between science and philosophy of which are two separate entities.

     

Share This Page