Science is a tool that can be abused!

[_The CCC]

Spotlight,

I see you are of the opinion that everything that can be measured has already been measured. You are of the opinion that everything possible to be discovered has already been discovered. I draw this conclusion from your statement. You refuse to accept even the possibility that there are more things to be discovered in reality. That is one hell of a science you got there.

Enough has been discovered to falsify dualism. If you understood falsification you'd understand that principle. It does not matter how much evidence is gathered that is compatible with a theory, it still never proves a theory true. It is always possible that the theory will be proven to be untrue however if something is eventually discovered that breaks it. In this case quite a lot of evidence breaks the theory of dualism and along with dualism goes your hypothesis as well.

All it took to break Newtonian mechanics was the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. So all of your crowing about how what we now know will one day all be obsolete is already true about dualism. It just hasn't filtered down to everyday people in society yet. Give it another generation for that to happen.

A scientific theory is just the best explanation we have, so far, for a given observation. As such science is always tentative. IE; Every one accepts that gravity works. However we're still trying to understand it. SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

[_spotlight]

Enough has been discovered to falsify dualism. If you understood falsification you'd understand that principle. It does not matter how much evidence is gathered that is compatible with a theory, it still never proves a theory true. It is always possible that the theory will be proven to be untrue however if something is eventually discovered that breaks it. In this case quite a lot of evidence breaks the theory of dualism and along with dualism goes your hypothesis as well.

All it took to break Newtonian mechanics was the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. So all of your crowing about how what we now know will one day all be obsolete is already true about dualism. It just hasn't filtered down to everyday people in society yet. Give it another generation for that to happen.

A scientific theory is just the best explanation we have, so far, for a given observation. As such science is always tentative. IE; Every one accepts that gravity works. However we're still trying to understand it. SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

I believe I covered that here: "It does not matter how much evidence is gathered that is compatible with a theory, it still never proves a theory true. It is always possible that the theory will be proven to be untrue however if something is eventually discovered that breaks it."

The thing is dualism was a hypothesis, one that was held by some to be tentatively true but has now been falsified.

[_Gunnar]

All it took to break Newtonian mechanics was the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. So all of your crowing about how what we now know will one day all be obsolete is already true about dualism. It just hasn't filtered down to everyday people in society yet. Give it another generation for that to happen.

About Newtonian mechanics, I prefer to look at it is not so much disproved, as proven to be a not quite complete or perfectly accurate description of how the universe works. For most practical. every day purposes it is more than accurate and precise enough, and produces errors that are immeasurably small even by some of our most amazingly precise measuring devices. Even rocket scientists use Newtonian mechanics to calculate the trajectories of space probes launched into orbit and to other destinations in the solar system. As I understand it, Newton's three laws of motion are still perfectly valid when we recognize that mass and energy are two different aspects of the same thing, and can be converted into each other.

[_Franktalk]

Enough has been discovered to falsify dualism.

Really, and you have the nerve to say science is not a religion.

So I take it love and hate can't exist at the same time. What about a positron? Can it exist when electrons exist?

And what about the ZPE with all of those particles and antiparticles?

Then again you may have been referring to scientific dualism instead of this one.

du·al·ism
ˈd(y)o͞oəˌlizəm/
noun
noun: dualism; plural noun: dualisms

1.
the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided.
"a dualism between man and nature"
Philosophy
a theory or system of thought that regards a domain of reality in terms of two independent principles, especially mind and matter ( Cartesian dualism ).
noun: Cartesian dualism
the religious doctrine that the universe contains opposed powers of good and evil, especially seen as balanced equals.
in Christian theology, the heresy that in the incarnate Christ there were two coexisting persons, human and divine.
2.
the quality or condition of being dual; duality.

So using your belief system give me your special definition of dualism that prevents reality from containing things we haven't discovered yet.

[_Franktalk]

A scientific theory is just the best explanation we have, so far, for a given observation. As such science is always tentative. IE; Every one accepts that gravity works. However we're still trying to understand it. SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

I accept this. Many science disciples fail to hold this view. They prefer to worship at the feet of theories.

[_spotlight]

All it took to break Newtonian mechanics was the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. So all of your crowing about how what we now know will one day all be obsolete is already true about dualism. It just hasn't filtered down to everyday people in society yet. Give it another generation for that to happen.

About Newtonian mechanics, I prefer to look at it is not so much disproved, as proven to be a not quite complete or perfectly accurate description of how the universe works. For most practical. every day purposes it is more than accurate and precise enough, and produces errors that are immeasurably small even by some of our most amazingly precise measuring devices. Even rocket scientists use Newtonian mechanics to calculate the trajectories of space probes launched into orbit and to other destinations in the solar system. As I understand it, Newton's three laws of motion are still perfectly valid when we recognize that mass and energy are two different aspects of the same thing, and can be converted into each other.

I completely agree with you on this. I was making a point to Franktalk about falsification. It all seems to be over his head so I don't know how much longer I'll bother responding to his nonsense if nothing seems to crack through the wall he's hiding behind.

[_spotlight]

Enough has been discovered to falsify dualism.

Really, and you have the nerve to say science is not a religion.

So I take it love and hate can't exist at the same time. What about a positron? Can it exist when electrons exist?

And what about the ZPE with all of those particles and antiparticles?

Then again you may have been referring to scientific dualism instead of this one.

du·al·ism
ˈd(y)o͞oəˌlizəm/
noun
noun: dualism; plural noun: dualisms

1.
the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided.
"a dualism between man and nature"
Philosophy
a theory or system of thought that regards a domain of reality in terms of two independent principles, especially mind and matter ( Cartesian dualism ).
noun: Cartesian dualism
the religious doctrine that the universe contains opposed powers of good and evil, especially seen as balanced equals.
in Christian theology, the heresy that in the incarnate Christ there were two coexisting persons, human and divine.
2.
the quality or condition of being dual; duality.

So using your belief system give me your special definition of dualism that prevents reality from containing things we haven't discovered yet.

Umm, dualism meaning that the mind consists of an external soul as in Rene Descartes? Ever hear of him? "I think therefore I am" ring a bell? This is what I am referring to as it has application to your idea of detachable souls inhabiting bodies in the universe but they are really eternal in nature. Are we on the same page now?

[_Gunnar]

A scientific theory is just the best explanation we have, so far, for a given observation. As such science is always tentative. IE; Every one accepts that gravity works. However we're still trying to understand it. SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

I accept this. Many science disciples fail to hold this view. They prefer to worship at the feet of theories.

I very much doubt that there is a significant number of scientists who fail to hold that view, or would admit to it. It is such a basic scientific principle that to fail to hold that view would be virtually tantamount to admitting that one is not really a scientist after all.

[_spotlight]

A scientific theory is just the best explanation we have, so far, for a given observation. As such science is always tentative. IE; Every one accepts that gravity works. However we're still trying to understand it. SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

I accept this. Many science disciples fail to hold this view. They prefer to worship at the feet of theories.

The only thing that "counts" in science is the scientific consensus. Again theories are tentative until proven false. They can never be proven true. The theory (or hypothesis really) of dualism has been falsified by current evidence according to the scientific consensus. It was tentatively held by some to be true but now that is no longer the case. It does not matter what else we may learn from here on out. What we now know falsifies the concept of dualism. However many more examples we may find to support Newtonian mechanics will be irrelevant because the precession of the perihelion of Mercury falsifies it. In like manner any data that may be found that agrees with dualism will be irrelevant because we already have the facts that falsify it.

This is really a tough nut to crack for those who worship at the feet of inconsistent ignorance.

[_Franktalk]

Umm, dualism meaning that the mind consists of an external soul as in Rene Descartes? Ever hear of him? "I think therefore I am" ring a bell? This is what I am referring to as it has application to your idea of detachable souls inhabiting bodies in the universe but they are really eternal in nature. Are we on the same page now?

So you accept the idea of dualism even though we are in a sea of opposites? All of those opposites we have embraced in our society are fine but Lord help us if anyone talks of something not on the approved list.