evince (05-28-2021), ThatOwlWoman (05-28-2021)
Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, Minister of Truth, The Anonymous, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Niche Political Commentor, Superfreak, volsrock, Yurt, Lord Yurt, OG Yurt and Yakuda |
My favorite physicist discusses whether two notions of human experience are outside the purview of science (and strictly religious in scope), or whether the scientific method could ultimately resolve these:
1. The nature of human consciousness
2. Why the universe exists, aka why is there something, rather than nothing?
evince (05-28-2021), ThatOwlWoman (05-28-2021)
It seems to me that Dr. Carrol destroys the fine-tuning of the universe argument for theism.
evince (05-28-2021)
I will listen to anything Dr. Carrol says about physics, philosophy, the nature of reality.
We have thermodynamics pretty dialed in concerning the evolution and ultimate fate of the universe. But we remain pretty clueless on how to explain complexity, the origin of life, and how or why entropy would express itself in the organization of life and consciousness.
evince (05-28-2021)
Excellent
He does just what he speaks of on the last couple of minutes in this video
He explains it in a common level speech that conveys the ideas in a very accessible manner that also doesn’t leave his colleagues snoring
Great stuff
Thanks
Cypress (05-28-2021)
He says things in his first two videos that were exactly part of my thinking as a teen when I realized I was an atheist
Religion was merely mans attempt to explain and understand life without the facts we now have
Then like the nature of humans those explanations were used in an attempt to control the population to achieve power over their lives
Well intended but very flawed to in the end
Yet again bolstering my beliefs that most humans are mostly good
A few are like saints
And a few are complete rat bastards
He is very easy to grok folks
Give the proff a listen
He is a top tier theoretical physicist who also has training and experiece as a philosopher and a teacher. That is probably why he is so skilled at not only explaining physics to the layperson, but how it all fits together in a larger conception of ultimate reality.
To me, he seems a tad optimistic that we can ultimately achieve all the answers to the nature of ultimate reality. But I still think that speaks well of him as a scientist - what is the point of doing science unless one thinks there is a real possibility of peeling back the onion skins on the scope of ultimate reality?
evince (05-28-2021)
Science that is based in knowable proven fact is how we know the parts of reality that we do know
It’s the best path to reality
Cypress (05-28-2021)
Those who deny science and its advances are the enemy of mankind
nice work
The only minor thing I would take issue with is that science does not prove anything, factual or otherwise.
The scientific method only has the power to disprove. Which is a powerful tool indeed in the arsenal of inductive reasoning.
At its best, science gives us a high degree of confidence in our provisional knowlege about natural phenomena.
Yes it can prove things
It’s can prove some lies are lies
Which is why some abandoned science
And math
And history
Cypress (05-29-2021)
Thanks for visiting my thread, physics and philosophy are esoteric topics most people avoid like the plague - especially Republicans.
Whether or not science and history give us truth is an epistemological question.
What is beyond doubt is that conservatives and religious fundamentalists cultivate ignorance by denying scientific and historical knowlege.
Dr. Sean Carrol: Atheism is a reaction against theism. It is purely a rejection of an idea. It's not a positive substantive idea about how the world is.
Naturalism is a counterpart to theism. Theism says there’s the physical world and god. Naturalism says there’s only the natural world. There are no spirits, no deities, or anything else. Poetic naturalism emphasizes that there are many ways of talking about the natural world. The fact that the underlying laws of physics are deterministic and impersonal does not mean that at the human level we can’t talk about ideas about reasons and goals and purposes and free will.
Naturalism says that we were not put here for any purpose. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t such thing as purpose. It just means that purpose isn’t imposed from outside. We human beings have the creative ability to give our lives purposes and meanings. Just as we have the ability to determine what is right or wrong, beautiful or ugly. That point of view is not only allowed, it is challenging and breathtaking in its scope.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wir...an-carroll/amp
Sean answers the big questions of ultimate reality.
Was there a beginning? Or not? (Probably was no beginning)
Why is there something rather than nothing? (Even empty space has an inherent latent energy)
On the flipside, I am willing to listen to the other side of the argument, from a scientist who is a devout Christian.
My stepmother bought me a book by Francis Collins.
Dr Francis Collins is the head of the Human Genome Project, and one of the world's leading geneticists.
Collins believes that faith in God and faith in science can coexist within a person and be harmonious. In 'The Language of God' he makes his case for God and for science. He has heard every argument against faith from scientists, and he can refute them. He has also heard the needless rejection of scientific truths by some people of faith, and he can counter that, too. He explains his own journey from atheism to faith, and then takes readers for a stunning tour of modern science to show that physics, chemistry, and biology can all fit together with belief in God.
https://www.commonword.ca/ResourceView/82/23258
Carroll is great. He actually understands philosophy.
Bookmarks