Message from @Dr.Wol
Discord ID: 504732806035800064
We both know, that those in power can compel "truth"
But no matter what they want they can't compel facts
That is why post-modernism is falling appart at every turn
Right, which is why I keep making the distinction between knowledge and scientific method.
Because you can't "Want" reality to change
The body of scientific knowledge and the amount I was able to verify is always imperfect.
But the scientific METHOD has proven itself in myriads of scenarios.
they're not falling apart. they might very well win. this fight is nowhere close to won.
So even though I do not have perfect knowledge, I have an ALGORITHM by which to proceed.
they will keep fighting, by any means necessary, forever.
yes
Let's say you programmed a robot:
but their "dreams" are incompatible with reality
so they'll never be able to achieve them
make it exterminate humanity
You can program a path navigation, but you can never test the robot in all conceivable environments.
Still, you can program a robot that does a decent job at navigating a room.
I have programmed such robots.
Its like trannies,
They might look like it,
They might act like it,
They might believe they are,
But they are not the other biological sex
hypocrit that you are, for you trust the same chemicals in your head to tell you they are chemicals
will you fight? or will you perish like a dog?
The algorithm is the scientific method - the specific rooms are akin to the knowledge and scenarios that I have tested.
Once I have test a lot of rooms, I get more confident. Do I have certainty? No.
even in failure post-modernists cause massive pain and suffering and threaten the entire world. the soviet union was the direct result of post-modern philosophy and not only did they kill millions, they very nearly destroyed the earth on several occasions.
Yes
and they never got their dream
isn't it even a communist motto?
"If you die from startvation, you just didn't want to live enough"?
lmao just dab on starvation
just eat xD
This topic will not go anywhere if discussed in this way. You can do good and bad things in the name of science and in the name of religion.
If we want to make sensible comparisons, we have to discuss its methods.
religion gives people a purpose greater than their own
for people who can't think of a purpose for themselves
What is our standard? My standard is how accurate each is at making sense of reality.
i dono i think its kinda the other way around
ideas have people
lol transgenderism as a social construct
The scientific method has an undeniable track record and where it conflicts with religion should supersede it.
checkmate
The scientific institutions, on the other hand, and our scientific knowledge, is imperfect. We have gender studies.
It is the difference between algorithm and implementation.
but thats the result of post-modernism which me and atkins discussed just now
A sorting implementation can be wrong, but it's algorithm, on paper, can still be correct.
The scientific method has been shown to be very good, but its implementation is lacking a lot of times.