TL:DR

A piss i took last year, is part of some fish animals body in Australia by now

regardless, just cause there is no explenation, does not mean that there is non to be found

assuming its impossible to find a cause is a fallacy whos name i cant come up with atm

I hate that mindset if there is no explanation then it isn't real

That's so stupid

The best evidence for reincarnation according to ian stevenson, are the number of "cases of subjects who have birthmarks or birth defects that seem to derive from previous lives. These marks and defects correspond closely in size and location to wounds (occasionally other marks) on the deceased person whose life the child later claims to remember."*

oof

wait

At the very least there is something going on that we don't know about

CAPITAL OOF is more appropriate

That's always the case

XD my birthark covers my dick XD

So why brush it aside?

uh oh

But it doesn't mean two things are related

Extraordinary claims without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence

And something to keep in my mind, is that none of his work is peer reviewed by actual peers

(serious)

Do you believe in every supernatural claim?

it has only been published in pseudoscience journals

if we stick to the scientific method this is clearly not science, as the theory is non falsefiable

its also non-provable

Honestly it's either that or submit myself to moral nihilism

Except that's not true

Those are two extremes.

moral nihilism aint so bad

Also it's theoretically provable

you dont feel strongly one way or the other

not really, you can do what i do and be agnostic on the subject

nah moral nihilism has a solution

If I'm just gonna disappear into nothing then what's the point in anything?

Moral Nihilism, isn't that the thing of "nothing matters"?

the commitment to the minimization of the suffering you can be accountable for

If there's no point in anything why not disappear into nothing now?

no one thinks their own pain is nothing after all

Exactly

If the universe is going to end in heat death, why should I bother going on, right?

Grow a pair of balls, and make something good happen in life

So they'll build a statue, immortalise yourself in humanities eyes

Then you wont be disappearing 😉

But you wouldn't would you

If we proved 100% that there was no afterlife you would still likely not kill yourself

This is the problem with Atheists.

we should build a statue for the guy that invented the sewer system at some point

Once you get rid of religion, we feel like we have to replace it with something else.

Oh i'm a problem now Rye? 😛

@RyeNorth Atheism isn't a belief system though. It's just a rejection of faith in god

You don't have to replace it with more religion

it can be replaced by secular sources

It would be fine if that was all it was but most atheists are naturalists

religion is a human universal, there are also extracts of plants and other drugs that can reliably induce a religious experience

well thats human instinct, we need a purpose

for many people, Religion and being part of "something greater" is their percieved purpose

take it away without something to fill the void, and they becme SJW's

there is something in our brain that makes us want to be religious

Like, take me

this does not mean we should not critisize them ofc

I'm an objectivist

the sense of purpose Cytos! wanting to be part of something "GREATER"

lmao, shiv told me to take her

unfortunaly she is underage

i'm an objectionist! I'm against what you say!

[Rand Intensifies]

I form my morals from philosophy

I do not need religion

And this applies to most people

you do though

The point is, once you reject God, you have to have something else to explain things you can never know

in the way we evolved it that is

not religion,

Purpose!

@RyeNorth Wikipedia

its the same thing kinda

I just clean my room

See this is the thing people seem to assume you need to believe in god for the supernatural

@RyeNorth No i don't,

I know its not god, what it IS i don't know, but i know theres a scientific way to explain it 😉

And that is not the cse

BUCKO

we subsribe meaning and rythem to systems we observe, even those we can not explain, even on a subconscious level

The key is ACCEPTING that you won't know until you get there.

which is the religion aspect of inate human cognition

beliving in god helps Mallic,

Cuz people who don't believe in imaginary sky-people tend to not believe in imaginary superstition either

you can not reason everything, you gotta have faith in somethings to remain the same

Here's my opinion about the supernatural. Nothing is true until there is empirical evidence

our brain cant handle the cognitive effort to reason it all

which can be shown in repeatable models

that which we trust in to be the case over and over without cognition, that is our religion system

and everyone has one of those

But then youbwould just label it as natureal

does not involve a god or anything

yes we can Cythos

People just want purpose, they don't care about how solid the explanation is

They just wanna be part of something greater, its ain instinct meant to keep us together so we'd mate and continue the species

shyv have you read any Kant?

I am open to considering theories, but i refuse to accept them until empirical evidence comes up

Basically, what Shiv said.

I heard evidence is racist guys ...

Sure, reincarnation *could* be a thing.

because its essentially the philosophical predecessor to the pragmatists that led to objectivism

Same with something like the Big Bang, or the multiple theories about the origin of the universe

Like those police body cameras

in the sense

But on the other side of death, there's no way of knowing.

did you not accept the sun would come up every day, before you even know the model of the solar system?

do you not accept your car to start when you turn the ignition

nobody rejected the sun coming up Cytos

People rejeced that we circle around the sun, instead of the sun around us

you cant pull up a chair to a table, without assuming when you plant your ass, it will hold you

Honestly I will take any thing over just ceasing to exist

Now, as per the key to avoiding Nihilism, you have to accept the moment you're in.

you obviously never sat on a childrens plastic chair as an adult 😄

that the pragmatists looked to answer the problems that Kant brought up with both the reality of feels and reals

im just saying that the "i only believe things empyrically proven" thing is a lie

no its not 😮

how even perception is flawed just liek how emotions are

there are things you can not have seen the proof for, that you do use

because that proof does not yet exist

If you live a life to reduce the suffering of others, up until the day you find out what happens on the other side of death

Peace

What have you really lost?

im not saying you cant maximise this.. edict

proof of existance doesn't equal proof of outcome Cytos

I don't need to test my car to believe it will work next time i turn the keys around

@>Cytos, de lieve goede synth Dude, I do not need to understand how an engine works to accept that a car can turn on

how about a lamp

I mean isn't there some sort of unprovability theorum or something?

even then, five minutes on wikipedia

FIVE

well you do need to have an understanding to the point that you know how to turn a car on

you cant learn mechanics and physics and chemistry involved in a car in 5 minutes lmoa

You can learn how an engine operates

but even if you could

which is still an understanding hof how a car works, regardless of how low resolution and incomplete it is

🤔

the basic principles

you can actually

Just gotta know the concept of physics, chemistry and energy transferance

you cant do it for everything you do take for granted

but this actually relies on teh faith you have that it will work either way

there is too much proof, and not enough time

there also is not enough proof, in theory, for a being with infinite time

energy transference was explained to me in highschool as "Leprechauns with energy globes running through a track of wire"

Nah, most of them operate on the same principles

False equivalency, Cytos

I don't recall general becoming shitposting but then again I'm new here kek

That's another thing that gets me why are soft sciences like psychology considered the same as pseudosciences?

General is a wildcard

this issnt really shitposting tbh

@Mallic Literally who

They aren't, only portions of them are

You are lol

Unless you're talking about people who call JBP a pseudoscientist

which is hilarious

Plenty considering it's harder to get empirical evidence regarding human behavior then it is for hard sciences like.physics

@Vesdii there have been several cases where Shitposting was used as a news-page in the past, just roll with it

Nah a lot of early psych absolutely was pseudoscience

Like Freud

And crackpots like to hide behind psych

Freud was on a lot of shit man

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ONTOLOGY OF FAITH AND THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF EMPIRISISM

Sounds good

Psychology is medicine

Medicine is statistics, not a science

not shitposting

XD

@Vesdii to be honest general is pretty mild

Medicine you can never guarantee the outcome, you can only assume that statistically you get a desired outcome

So.just five people a prescription drug and shove em.out the door

medicine is a science lmao, science is only about predictability

anything else is BS

It's like giving people mainainance

Well that's part of the testing process sadly

Its not a cure all

You can not with absolute certaintly predict medicine Cytos

medicine works 80% of the time? thats pretictable

You try collections of chemicals until one works

Is it permanant?

Sometimes it just makes things worse

can add a couple of factors to make the prediction more or less likely? good science

thats statistics

Because while we understand a lot more about the brain it's still a very complex organ

you dont need an absolute solution for it to be science

If i repeat the same testing of a medicine 10,000 times all the same test i will not get 10,000 times the same outcome

It deals with a whole fuckton of functions and wires get crossed in weird ways

science produces theories of predictability

Sigh I really don't like such mechanical robotic approaches to science

This is why on medicine theres always that disclaimer of "May cause side-effects"

so if it gets 80% the same result, you can sciencefy that in 80% of the time you will get that result

thats not the scientific process though, thats statistics

Like did you know that separation between parts of the brain can "fix" epilepsy? Or that electroshock therapy is useful in cases of extreme depression?

XD sadly you need such an approach to get repeatable, if not 100%, results

Yeah the point ultimately is that we keep testing and iterating

Is this why certain circles hate rupert sheldrake so much?

XD just ask tesla

Nobody iterates on "it's magic"

Scientific process is, you make a hypothesis

And every single time i test it (bar wrongful anomalies) i will get the exact same outcome as your hypothesis prescribes

im sure he was mad depressed

and was electrocuting himself

as a treatment

That's not a treatment that's a fetish

hey if it worked

principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses

i mean fuck he lost everything and died pennyless

there is nothing in that definition about absolute predictive capacity

did not seem like he was to traumatised about it till after he stopped shocking himself daily due to losing hsi equipment

if something was only science when you can prove what will happen 100% of the time, the only thing that maybe could be science is math

MAYBE

there has to be, else I can just say "i scientificaly predict that the Earth will blow up in 10 seconds"

And when it doesn't i said "Oh well, it doesn't have to be predictable, so its still a sciencE"

i mean there is a fundamentals issue there but whatever

Also probably because "telepathy" is bunk, @Mallic

@Mallic Really, if you want to fight Nihilism, if you want to give your life a purpose, just consider family members and friends that you remember fondly that aren't here anymore. Think about the effect that they had on your life. Quit worrying over the destination, and focus on the journey. Even if the future were to not matter in the grand scheme of the universe, even if we're unimportant specks, we don't live on a Universal scale, We live on an insignificant blue spec. And everything here matters to us. Any chance we have of figuring it all out comes in pushing the human race forward. Our impact goes beyond our lives.

Now I think I'm done trying to be inspirational for the day, I've got work to do.

No, science works everywhere like this,

The whole point of science is that anyone can test it using the same parameters and limits, in the same physical universe, will get the same result,
It can be peer-reviewed

insignificant blue spec: <:VeRiFiEd:463064374236413962>

There has been, for years, a bounty on any supernatural phenomena, wherein proof of psychic powers will net you a monetary prize. Nobody has ever won

the same resultS

plural

on average

The.problem is assuming that peep aren't biased in peer reviewa

you cant just test a thing once and be done with it

gotta test it a thousand times may not be enough

you can test it as often as you like, the point is the result will be the same

imagine if one result was enough, you could make a theory of a result of a cointoss

thats teh scientifc method

Bias doesn't mean "let's believe anything" though

as soon as you make 2 results, it does not become statistics lmao

the point of the scientific method, is that a person can recreate it if they don't believe you,

And every time they do it they'll get the same result

there are tools to seperate yourself from your bias

resultS

Ok ok what i told you guys that panpsychism is becoming more and more academically credible?

even if to only make that bias apparant

so that others may recognise

plural results

You need resultS for the initial testing to confirm it

But anyone who doesn't believe you can run the same test once to see that the original hypothesis is true again

its the whole point, that anyone can recreate the test

I'd ask you for your sources

yes, but just testing it once is not going to prove or disprove anything

if medicine is only 80% accurate

1 out of every 5 tests will yield a different result

So if 50 scientists test it, 10 will have a different result (statistically)

That means that they wont get the same results 20% of the time

and testing things 2 or more times does not make it any less of a science

you can test it to confirm it

thats the whole point of it

If you don't believe it, you can retest it

a billion trilliong gazillion times

Idk if Thomas nagal.is any indication there are plenty who don't want anything other then nautealism to be true

but if the hypothesis is accurate it will yield the same results

only restesting when you dont get the results you want is bad form

in the cointoss experiment you can believe you will get heads, get heads once and not restest

So you're saying we have to test gravity every time we wake up?

im saying we test gravity a bunch of times in different scenarios every day

its predictable how it will behave

aka its science

A scientific theory gets accepted if many MANY people tested it and all got the same conclusion, meaning it has been tested thousands of times


Yet if you DON'T believe it, you can feel free to test it as many times as you want

and if you go into outer space and shit does not always fall the way you expect, then you make a new theory

but it still needs to be predictable

test it once, test it hundreds of times, its gonna be the same

so when you wake up in space you know what might happen

on average

no, thats a conclusion we draw based on tests we confirmed scientifically

@Mallic you mean the philosopher? That doesn't sound like much in the way of evidence to me

Simplified:
If i drop a bottle on earth, i confirm the test of gravity,

Knowing how gravity works, i can ASSUME that if i drop a brick on earth, it will apply the same effect,

If it doesn't, and i drop the brick and it flies off, it proves my hypothesis was wrong

what did you say about medicine again? that it was not science?

its statistics, because i can't predict its endings with certainty

if that is your standard, which you can believe it to be