Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, Gin Saké, The Anonymous, Primavera, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Niche Political Commentor, Superfreak, volsrock, Yurt, Lord Yurt, OG Yurt and Yakuda


Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Best of Sean Carrol, theoretical physicist & philosopher

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default Best of Sean Carrol, theoretical physicist & philosopher

    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?


  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (05-28-2021), ThatOwlWoman (05-28-2021)

  3. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    It seems to me that Dr. Carrol destroys the fine-tuning of the universe argument for theism.


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (05-28-2021)

  5. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    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.


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (05-28-2021)

  7. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    138,367
    Thanks
    42,328
    Thanked 23,253 Times in 18,058 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 18,918 Times in 17,528 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    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

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Cypress (05-28-2021)

  9. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    138,367
    Thanks
    42,328
    Thanked 23,253 Times in 18,058 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 18,918 Times in 17,528 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    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

  10. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    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
    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?

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (05-28-2021)

  12. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    138,367
    Thanks
    42,328
    Thanked 23,253 Times in 18,058 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 18,918 Times in 17,528 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Cypress (05-28-2021)

  14. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    138,367
    Thanks
    42,328
    Thanked 23,253 Times in 18,058 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 18,918 Times in 17,528 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

  15. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    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
    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.

  16. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    138,367
    Thanks
    42,328
    Thanked 23,253 Times in 18,058 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 18,918 Times in 17,528 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Cypress (05-29-2021)

  18. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    Yes it can prove things


    It’s can prove some lies are lies


    Which is why some abandoned science


    And math


    And history
    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.

  19. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default Sean Carrol on God, atheism, and poetic naturalism

    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

  20. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    36,133
    Thanks
    18,016
    Thanked 24,457 Times in 12,670 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 2,322 Times in 2,087 Posts

    Default

    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)

Similar Threads

  1. Freeman Dyson, legendary theoretical physicist, dies at 96
    By Primavera in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-06-2020, 04:39 AM
  2. Albert Einstein: Physicist, Philosopher, Humanitarian
    By Cypress in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-11-2019, 09:09 AM
  3. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 10-31-2018, 08:13 AM
  4. Theoretical Discussion: Could an Executive Order overturn a law?
    By zombienerd in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-06-2012, 01:51 PM
  5. Theoretical election
    By FUCK THE POLICE in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-20-2009, 10:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •