just realized...this is not the science section...

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by TheJourney, May 3, 2011.

  1. #1 TheJourney, May 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2011
    Most of the people on here who are always arguing and calling people stupid do such because what others say is not consistent with what scientists say. Well guess what? THIS ISN'T THE SCIENCE SECTION! There's a whole section dedicated to science. This is for philosophy and spirituality.

    Also, name-calling is against forum rules, so I'm gonna have to start reporting when it happens :)
  2. But this is also a philosophy section and applying scientific evidence in a philosophical debate is acceptable (I feel in a religious discussion the use of scientific proofs is valid also), or are there only certain can of proofs and arguments that are valid and acceptable in religious and philosophical discussions?
  3. skepticism stems from philosophy, so I feel it's justified to apply skepticism to at least the philosophy side of the section.
  4. Science can be alluded to in these discussions, but it is NOT the purpose. For instance, someone just made a thread about some beliefs he has. Someone then proceeded to dismiss and ridicule what he said by saying that scientists would call his theory nonsense. Once again, THIS IS NOT THE SCIENCE SECTION! The entire purpose of this forum is to discuss our spiritual and philosophical beliefs, not call other peoples' stupid because scientists don't agree
  5. My spiritual and philosophical beliefs center around science, it's my corner stone. I feel it is more then appropriate, now being rude without being provoked is not something I would condone but I feel that is another discussion.
  6. I wouldn't even mention it if there wasn't the rudeness. However, you will find that the ones who are so rude all the time are the same ones who use science as their justification for calling other people stupid. Well, this forum isn't the science section, so if you're just going to use science as a means for calling other people stupid, take it to the science section
  7. #7 ArgoSG, May 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2011
    Since this post refers to my post and me personally, I feel compelled to address it thoroughly. TheJourney thinks philosophy and spirituality should be "anything and everything goes", basically. Do I even need to explain how wrong that is? Serious question, not rhetorical.

    Anyway, when someone makes a scientific claim, I think it's justified to say something along the lines of "the experts would think this is idiotic." For instance:

    Billy Joe was raised in Arkansas as a fundamentalist Christian. He believes that the Old testament is the written word of the creator of the universe. He expresses an idea in the philosophy and spirituality forum along the lines of:

    "Hi brothers and sisters. I just wanted to share why I feel God wants us to beat children. He has given us his flawless wisdom in the Bible":

    Prov 13:24: "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (diligently)."
    Prov 19:18: "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying."
    Prov 22:15: "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him."
    Prov 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die."
    Prov 23:14: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell (Shoel)."
    Prov 29:15: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame."

    Suppose I say, in the Philosophy and Spirituality forum(*gasp*), that the field of modern child psychology has something to say about beating children in the context of their psychological let alone physical well-being.

    This is somehow inappropriate. We get it TheJourney. Your worldview is threatened by a body operating on a framework which attempts to seriously discern reality, and it could/has? delivered hammerblows to what you believe and/or your freedom to believe anything batshit crazy that you want. We understand. But whenever anyone seriously represents something about reality, in a philosophy forum, people will and should be allowed to call them out on it, i'm sorry.
  8. Philosophy and Science are not meant to be different pursuits, they are meant to be considered together. Philosophy should expand on science. So guess what? I'll continue talking about science.

    And anyway, it seems like more often it is the useless questioning of science that brings it up as a topic.
  9. are you saying we shouldn't be allowed to be skeptical of moronic claims?
    this isn't the communist section
  10. i wish they'd separate this forum already.
  11. #11 kojopolis, May 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2011
    yeah philosophy and spirituality need to be separated, honestly we have to do something guys
    the threads in this section have been so stupid lately i don't even come here anymore
    when i'm high i don't want to read about 'The theory of evolution debunked! The world really is only 6,000 years old?! WTF?!?' and 'Prove to me scientifically that Mathematics exist ' and 'Jesus loves you'
    i want some legit philosophy, no dumb threads and some shit that will get me thinking
  12. Ridiculous. As someone else said, it is religious people questioning science without looking it up themselves and claiming that just because they don't understand, that it must not be true. That is how science creeps in here. Besides, it's always good to double check yourself when you find yourself making threads AGAINST science.
  13. I think science and religion are sort of similar...

    I mean they both cant fully prove... anything...


  14. ...this is the philosophy section too?

    holy shit
  15. Agreed, I don't think people should argue and bicker about anythingggg science related in this section.

    Anything can be somehow linked to science. And that's where the science and nature thread comes in.

    If you feel something linked to science, then go on the science and nature section and make a thread about it.
  16. Philosophy is about examining the nature of reality, the properties of knowledge, and the meaning of humanity. Science can tell us plenty about that first bit, therefore it is unwise to suggest we should "ban" discussion about Science. Right now I am seeing two threads here that are purported to be about science, and both of them make religious points by questioning science or mathematics. How about we just not question science without also providing more sensible answers?
  17. i are dont like logik
  18. philosophy: from Gk. philosophia "love of knowledge, wisdom"

    science: from L. scientia "knowledge"

    hmm... interesting
  19. phi·los·o·phy
       /fɪˈlɒsəfi/ Show Spelled[fi-los-uh-fee] Show IPA
    –noun, plural -phies.
    the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.
    any of the three branches, namely natural philosophy, moral philosophy, and metaphysical philosophy, that are accepted as composing this study.
    a system of philosophical doctrine: the philosophy of Spinoz
    From Dictionary.com
  20. Does this mean we should talk about 'spirituality and philosophy' in the 'science and nature' thread???

    Yes, they are related.

    But if you want to talk science go to the science section :smoke:

Share This Page