Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Of Course Reality Is Real! Silly Me!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Aurino Souza on April 2, 2002 21:17:51 UTC

Dick,

As I have defined reality, reality is "Something A": the facts or information I wish to explain. It is my explanation which is a figment of my imagination. And, my senses, being part of that explanation are also a figment of my imagination.

Well, I guess the real issue is not whether an independent reality exists, which is obviously the case. The real problem is explaining it. I guess I would be more correct if I said our subconscious creates an explanation for reality. I got mixed up.

No, it is the explanation "something B" which is not real, and your senses, also being part of the explanation cannot be "real".

I guess we're stuck with the habit of calling our sense impressions "reality".

I think what scientists do is to define everything I am speaking of as "real". That leads them to the induction dilemma: "something B" (and their senses) can only be proved to exist through induction and no proof of induction exists.

I guess science's major blunder is to ignore the role of the observer. They are fully aware of the fact that the observer imposes constraints on the observations, they know what those constraints are, but decide to ignore the issue altogether.

In essence that is exactly what I have done. However, I get to keep physics and any science which can be deduced from physics. It has been their inability to do that which has stopped the scientists from taking that selfsame step.

I also think one of science's major goals is to provide support for materialistic worldviews. That certainly stands in the way of good, unbiased research as some hypothesis become impossible to pursue simply due to lack of funds.

I admit I sometimes get insulting and obtuse intentionally. Particularly when I find myself dealing with small minds. "It keeps people honest! Drives off the riffraff so to speak; anyone with an open mind can comprehend that it is possible for [any] "dogmatic claim" to be correct and lays belief aside in favor of thought!"

I don't know, I think one has to do some PR if one's ideas are to be taken seriously. At least it demonstrates you have enough confidence in your ideas to be willing to make some sacrifices to promote them.

What do I think? I think the world lost an intelligent thinker when you dropped out of science.

Now you made me blush...

As Dilbert says, if we're so smart how come we're still working here?

Have fun,

Aurino

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins