INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

The Electricity of Touch

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: The Electricity of Touch

#41 Post by Nirvanam » October 1st, 2009, 11:49 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Gurdur wrote:,,,, nvm.
My first reaction was " :pointlaugh: LOL! he is obviously pulling my leg and did it well enough to make me laugh at myself".
Now, the only problem is I don't understand what you were intending to say or what the symbolismn ",,,, nvm" means. So please enlighten me so I can do a :hilarity:

Dan
Posts: 298
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 5:05 pm

Re: The Electricity of Touch

#42 Post by Dan » October 4th, 2009, 11:30 pm

Nirvanam wrote:
What really mattes is first the individual. Are you and I as individuals open enough to consider a particular possibility. If we are then let us consider it and learn something about it in order to reject it. If we are not then probably we need a mirror to understand what we are fighting against or standing up for.
Must we consider every arbitrary "possibility" (i.e. anything anyone ever thinks up) as though all "possibilities" were equal? Are we closed minded if we regard magic as drivel?

What has been proven to be successful is the rational, empirical, scientific approach. There is no other way to establish facts and make progress. None. At all. If you're not being rational, empirical, and scientific then you aren't going to be adding to knowledge. Note I'm not saying that only the rational, empirical and scientific is important in life, just that only the rational, empirical and scientific can generate reliable knowledge.

Nobody has ever cured anything by magic. Nodody has ever invented anything useful by magic. Magic doesn't work. It's a waste of everyone's time, effort and resources, and it leads to delusion and death and the world would be better off without people who promote magic.

This paper being discussed here is magic; pseudoscientific bullshit that only attracts people who want magic to work. But that way of thinking is dead dead dead.

Dan

A

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: The Electricity of Touch

#43 Post by Nirvanam » October 5th, 2009, 9:43 pm

Dan wrote:
Nirvanam wrote:
What really mattes is first the individual. Are you and I as individuals open enough to consider a particular possibility. If we are then let us consider it and learn something about it in order to reject it. If we are not then probably we need a mirror to understand what we are fighting against or standing up for.
Must we consider every arbitrary "possibility" (i.e. anything anyone ever thinks up) as though all "possibilities" were equal? Are we closed minded if we regard magic as drivel?
Definitely not. The individual chooses based on his or her interest in the topic.
Dan wrote:What has been proven to be successful is the rational, empirical, scientific approach. There is no other way to establish facts and make progress. None. At all. If you're not being rational, empirical, and scientific then you aren't going to be adding to knowledge. Note I'm not saying that only the rational, empirical and scientific is important in life, just that only the rational, empirical and scientific can generate reliable knowledge.
I am with you on this. What I am saying is that what we think is irrational at a particular point in time may later be proved to be rational with general growth in knowledge in many related areas. History is proof enough for this.
Dan wrote:This paper being discussed here is magic; pseudoscientific bullshit that only attracts people who want magic to work.
I don't think what is being said in the paper is "magic". You are not open to figuring whether there is a possibility of such a thing. I am. Does it make you a more "rational" person than me, I doubt. Does it make me a person who believes in magic: I don't think so. I am open to the possibility because I have experienced feeling better when someone would touch my forehead with their palms when I was having a bad headache. The warmth of that touch relieved my pain for that moment in time.

Dan
Posts: 298
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 5:05 pm

Re: The Electricity of Touch

#44 Post by Dan » October 6th, 2009, 6:23 pm

Nirvanam wrote: I am with you on this. What I am saying is that what we think is irrational at a particular point in time may later be proved to be rational with general growth in knowledge in many related areas. History is proof enough for this.
No, you're not with me on this. I think you're exploiting an ambiguity in the word "rational", whereby some people might say that at one time it was "rational" to talk about, say, the ether, but that now it has been proved to be "irrational" (and that "therefore" there's no barrier to magic). But that's not my line at all.

Reason is a tool. Either you use it or you reject it. You may make mistakes even if you adopt reason/science/empirical enquiry. You may, for example, think that ether exists. That doesn't mean that when ether was ruled out of models of physics that the previous acceptance of it was "irrational". It might mean that believing it now in the teeth of the evidnece is "irrational".

The point being that "magic" - the rejection of reason - can never become rational. Either you adopt science or you do not. Regardless of what happens to the state of our knowledge over time, failing to adopt science means you fail to contribute to knowlege. All advocates of esoteric ideas have to do to join the genuine seekers after knowledge, is to adopt genuine scientific methods.

I'll put all that another way: it's not what we claim to know which is rational or irrational, but our grounds for claiming to know it.
Dan wrote: You are not open to figuring whether there is a possibility of such a thing. I am. Does it make you a more "rational" person than me, I doubt. Does it make me a person who believes in magic: I don't think so. I am open to the possibility because I have experienced feeling better when someone would touch my forehead with their palms when I was having a bad headache. The warmth of that touch relieved my pain for that moment in time.
No, I'm not open to that "possibility" (let's be clear, everyone knows that physical contact is generally good for wellbeing, that's not what I am not open to. What I am not open to is magical explanations of the explanation for that feeling of wellbeing generated by physical contact). I'm not open to lots of stuff that people make up. Who cares, though, what I personally am or am not open to? It doesn't matter what I think.

Because, all advocates of magic have to do is adopt the tools of science and reason and do some proper empirical investigation of their bizarre notions. Then I can bluster and fuss and put my fingers in myears and go la la la all I like, but if the results of rigorous tests are positive, then I'll not have a leg to stand on.

Really I'm a very open minded man. I'll accept anything if it's been rationally tested. All I'm really closed to is stuff that people invent and which they refuse to subject to the tools of rational inquiry, because they think, wrongly, that there are other routes to knowledge.

Dan

Marian
Posts: 3985
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 2:25 pm

Re: The Electricity of Touch

#45 Post by Marian » October 7th, 2009, 1:11 pm

dan wrote:it's not what we claim to know which is rational or irrational, but our grounds for claiming to know it.
I know you were attempting to give another explanation to Nirvanam when you wrote this. I agree with you regarding the scientific method since it provides a more measurable type of proof. At the same time, I can't help but disagree with your above statement in the following sense: a schizophrenic who claims to hear voices is irrational. We can't scientifically prove that he is indeed hearing voices but nonetheless he is not rational. It behooves us though to treat his hearing voices as legitimate (and to the schizophrenic they are real).
Could Nirvanam feeling better after hands touched him be a result of placebo effect? (Nirvanam, I am not implying you are schizophrenic here; it was just the best example I could think of at the moment.)
Transformative fire...

Post Reply