7 Replies to “Then and Now

  1. 1
    asauber says:

    If you can’t validate results, then you have a thing called Scientism, which is sciencey trappings surrounding speculations, which are then presented to the public as science.

    Global Warmers, Evolutionists, Nutriophiles, Psychobabblers and Green Eneragents, please chime in with your confirmation on this.

    Andrew

  2. 2
    polistra says:

    Almost right. “Renaming the theory as a hypothesis” should be “Renaming the theory as a fact”.

    Fashionable theories are facts, intrinsically and tautologically true from the start of time.

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    Sometime between then and now, i.e. between the founding of the scientific method in Christian Europe during the middle ages,,,

    Albertus Magnus (1193-1250) and Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), two students of scholasticism, a philosophical system emphasizing the use of reason in exploring questions of philosophy and theology. Magnus made a distinction between revealed truth (revelation of something unknown through a divine power) and experimental science and made many scientific observations in astronomy, chemistry, geography and physiology.

    Roger Bacon (c.1210-c.1293), an English Franciscan friar, philosopher, scientist and scholar who called for an end to blind acceptance of widely accepted writings. In particular, he targeted Aristotle’s ideas, which, while valuable, were often accepted as fact even when evidence did not support them.

    Francis Bacon (1561-1626), a successful lawyer and influential philosopher who did much to reform scientific thinking. In his “Instauratio Magna­,” Bacon proposed a new approach to scientific inquiry, which he published in 1621 as the “Novum Organum Scientiarum.” This new approach advocated inductive reasoning as the foundation of scientific thinking. Bacon also argued that only a clear system of scientific inquiry would assure man’s mastery over the world.

    ,,, Sometime between then and now, with “now” the imposition of methodological naturalism being artificially imposed onto the scientific method,

    Methodological naturalism is the label for the required assumption of philosophical naturalism when working with the scientific method. Methodological naturalists limit their scientific research to the study of natural causes, because any attempts to define causal relationships with the supernatural are never fruitful, and result in the creation of scientific “dead ends” and God of the gaps-type hypotheses.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Methodological_naturalism

    Sometime between then and now, atheists somehow got into the mix and Teleology and Mind were jettisoned as rational scientific explanations,,,

    Teleology and the Mind – Michael Egnor – August 16, 2016
    Excerpt: From the hylemorphic perspective, there is an intimate link between the mind and teleology. The 19th-century philosopher Franz Brentano pointed out that the hallmark of the mind is that it is directed to something other than itself. That is, the mind has intentionality, which is the ability of a mental process to be about something, rather than to just be itself. Physical processes alone (understood without teleology) are not inherently about things. The mind is always about things. Stated another way, physical processes (understood without teleology) have no purpose. Mental processes always have purpose. In fact, purpose (aboutness-intentionality-teleology) is what defines the mind. And we see the same purpose (aboutness-intentionality-teleology) in nature.
    Intentionality is a form of teleology. Both intentionality and teleology are goal-directedness — intentionality is directedness in thought, and teleology is directedness in nature. Mind and teleology are both manifestations of purpose in nature. The mind is, within nature, the same kind of process that directs nature.
    In this sense, eliminative materialism is necessary if a materialist is to maintain a non-teleological Darwinian metaphysical perspective. It is purpose that must be denied in order to deny design in nature. So the mind, as well as teleology, must be denied. Eliminative materialism is just Darwinian metaphysics carried to its logical end and applied to man. If there is no teleology, there is no intentionality, and there is no purpose in nature nor in man’s thoughts.
    The link between intentionality and teleology, and the undeniability of teleology, is even more clear if we consider our inescapable belief that other people have minds. The inference that other people have minds based on their purposeful (intentional-teleological) behavior, which is obviously correct and is essential to living a sane life, can be applied to our understanding of nature as well. Just as we know that other people have purposes (intentionality), we know just as certainly that nature has purposes (teleology). In a sense, intelligent design is the recognition of the same purpose-teleology-intentionality in nature that we recognize in ourselves and others.
    Teleology and intentionality are certainly the inferences to be drawn from the obvious purposeful arrangement of parts in nature, but I (as a loyal Thomist!) believe that teleology and intentionality are manifest in an even more fundamental way in nature. Any goal-directed natural change is teleological, even if purpose and arrangement of parts is not clearly manifest. The behavior of a single electron orbiting a proton is teleological, because the motion of the electron hews to specific ends (according to quantum mechanics). A pencil falling to the floor behaves teleologically (it does not fall up, or burst into flame, etc.). Purposeful arrangement of parts is teleology on an even more sophisticated scale, but teleology exists in even the most basic processes in nature. Physics is no less teleological than biology.
    https://evolutionnews.org/2016/08/teleology_and_t/

    Sometime between then and now, somehow atheists got into the mix, and Teleology and Mind were jettisoned from scientific explanations, and “now” imagination and insanity have taken over in science where reality and logic use to reign supreme:

    For example:

    Many worlds, many problems… one of them serious
    Excerpt: “It (MWI) says that our unique experience as individuals is not simply a bit imperfect, a bit unreliable and fuzzy, but is a complete illusion.”
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/many-worlds-many-problems-one-of-them-serious/#comment-666850

  4. 4
    vmahuna says:

    Well, OK, but EVERYTHING related to government funding works about the same way. The one thing that’s missing is something like “check with pressure groups and politicians about what THEY would like your study to prove”. If you can get support from a congressman or senator, you can expect continuing money for whatever you write for as many decades as the politician holds office.

    The new “all electric” (no high-pressure steam, no hydraulics, no pneumatics) aircraft carriers are a COMPLETE, IRRETRIEVABLE FAILURE. The waste may finally reach a TRILLION tax dollars. At the same time, ex-USS Enterprise, the original nuclear-power carrier, has proven IMPOSSIBLE to scrap after 10 YEARS of trying. There seems to be be some problem with the HUGE amount of steel that has become radioactive. And of course Enterprise had EIGHT (small) nuclear reactors, which will eventually be buried SOMEPLACE. But it seemed like a GREAT idea at the time…

  5. 5
    Seversky says:

    Could it be that conspiracy theory is the much sought after Theory of Everything? Modern science is just a conspiracy of scientists to get rich on government grants. How about religion is just a conspiracy by advanced alien intelligences? When the time comes, they just beam everyone up and call it “rapture” and then they can pillage the planet of all its natural resources.

  6. 6
    Seversky says:

    vmahuna @ 4

    The new “all electric” (no high-pressure steam, no hydraulics, no pneumatics) aircraft carriers are a COMPLETE, IRRETRIEVABLE FAILURE

    Bit of an exaggeration. They’re having problems getting EMALS to work reliably. It’s certainly taking more time and costing a lot more money than expected. Test figures show about a 10% failure rate or 1 in 240 launches but a lot of cutting-edge technology has teething troubles.

    At the same time, ex-USS Enterprise, the original nuclear-power carrier, has proven IMPOSSIBLE to scrap after 10 YEARS of trying. There seems to be be some problem with the HUGE amount of steel that has become radioactive. And of course Enterprise had EIGHT (small) nuclear reactors, which will eventually be buried SOMEPLACE. But it seemed like a GREAT idea at the time…

    Oh, I wouldn’t worry about that. Once Trump has finished gutting the EPA of its regulatory powers and rolled back environmental regulations generally, they’ll be able to dump those reactors in a landfill near you which will glow pretty green at night once the minimal containment fails. So will anyone living nearby. And the best thing from the government’s point of view is that, with the regulations gone, any objectors won’t have a legal leg to stand on.

  7. 7
    kairosfocus says:

    Sev, don’t you know physicists glow in the dark? (That’s how you spot us at parties.) KF

    PS: Strictly, it is a bluish green. Gotta get the shade of the glow just right.

Leave a Reply