Simple question for those that said 'yes': how did we acquire knowledge of the scientific method?

(October 12, 2013 at 7:00 pm)paulpablo Wrote: babies respond to music, you respond to music and appreciate it but that doesn't indicate you acquired any knowledge, to learn more about the music and to acquire knowledge would require more studying and testing.

And I am telling you I DO acquire knowledge from it. Studying and testing it? Some people do that. Most just enjoy it and LEARN from it, in ways that are simply not scientific. Maybe this is not your experience, and that's fine. Study and test music all you want. But please do not tell me what my own experience is; that's Sword of Christ's job.

(September 28, 2013 at 12:07 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Hands-on experience works too.

But trying things to see what works is a fair equivalent of conducting an experiment. Contrast that with merely reading some silly shit in the goat herder's manual and accepting it as "true".

(October 12, 2013 at 8:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(September 28, 2013 at 12:07 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Hands-on experience works too.

But trying things to see what works is a fair equivalent of conducting an experiment. Contrast that with merely reading some silly shit in the goat herder's manual and accepting it as "true".

It appears that you're setting up a false dichotomy there, Min.

For things that are empirically testable, "trying things to see what works", while not strictly science, is utilizing empirical processes, the basis of science. Empiricism has it's limits - and for areas where empiricism cannot go, we use other methods (such as pure reason). No one method stands alone.

Your latter point I would agree with - so-called "revealed knowledge" is no knowledge at all. It has no place in epistemology in my view.

(October 12, 2013 at 2:00 pm)Zazzy Wrote:

(October 12, 2013 at 1:44 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Even in music and poetry you have to first still play the notes or write the words and test and experiment what they sound like.

Babies respond to music without having experimented. You don't have to play music or write poetry or understand anything about their production or the author's intent to appreciate them.

I don't play an instrument and I can't read music, but I know that certain pieces of music make me feel things that help me understand myself better. It's a personal thing that is difficult to describe (perhaps like theists' experiences of spiritual states), but it certainly isn't a scientific endeavor for me to listen to music.

And there are reasons the human brain responds to the mathematical scales, and harmonies, (math) of music.

Is it high irony, of just fucking stupidity the signature of someone asking this question says : "And this is because science is showing that the human mind is hard-wired for faith: we have, as a species, evolved to believe, which is one crucial reason why believers are happier – religious people have all their faculties intact, they are fully functioning humans."
(one of the most stupid assertions ever spouted).

(October 12, 2013 at 8:17 pm)Zazzy Wrote:

(October 12, 2013 at 7:00 pm)paulpablo Wrote: babies respond to music, you respond to music and appreciate it but that doesn't indicate you acquired any knowledge, to learn more about the music and to acquire knowledge would require more studying and testing.

And I am telling you I DO acquire knowledge from it. Studying and testing it? Some people do that. Most just enjoy it and LEARN from it, in ways that are simply not scientific. Maybe this is not your experience, and that's fine. Study and test music all you want. But please do not tell me what my own experience is; that's Sword of Christ's job.

You haven't said what knowledge you acquired from listening to it.

I agree that most people enjoy music but I don't know what reliable information can be gained from it.

(October 13, 2013 at 5:09 am)paulpablo Wrote: You haven't said what knowledge you acquired from listening to it.

I did. You should read my last post again.

Quote:I agree that most people enjoy music but I don't know what reliable information can be gained from it.

Your loss.

(October 13, 2013 at 9:26 am)Zazzy Wrote:

(October 13, 2013 at 5:09 am)paulpablo Wrote: You haven't said what knowledge you acquired from listening to it.

I did. You should read my last post again.

Quote:I agree that most people enjoy music but I don't know what reliable information can be gained from it.

Your loss.

Judging by the tone of your posts I've offended you in some way but I don't really care you seem oversensitive.

What knowledge have you gained from listening to music? I re read your post but couldn't find anything where you said anything along the lines of "I've gained knowledge of _________ by listening to music"

But in relation to the original topic of the thread there's lots of ways to acquire knowledge without science after thinking about it. Lots of girls who I've been out with knew a hell of a lot about harry potter to a very geeky degree and it required no science at all. Knowledge about fiction is unscientific.

(October 13, 2013 at 1:47 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Judging by the tone of your posts I've offended you in some way but I don't really care you seem oversensitive.

Not offended- I just don't like to repeat myself. Way to judge me a from a post or two, though.

Quote:What knowledge have you gained from listening to music? I re read your post but couldn't find anything where you said anything along the lines of "I've gained knowledge of _________ by listening to music"

Next time we talk I'll try to phrase things exactly the way you want me to. Because I care about the point, I'll try to be clearer. Listening to music makes me feel emotional, and gets me to thinking about how I understand myself in relationship to the world and to my own emotions. It's a way to find out things about myself and how I feel- which is knowledge.

Quote:But in relation to the original topic of the thread there's lots of ways to acquire knowledge without science after thinking about it. Lots of girls who I've been out with knew a hell of a lot about harry potter to a very geeky degree and it required no science at all. Knowledge about fiction is unscientific.

Agreed. As I said earlier, I also think poetry falls into this category.

(September 27, 2013 at 10:36 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: Is science the only way to knowledge?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...t-of-brain


funny that u started this

i ve of course had to deal with that too,,, u know

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/int...31989.aspx

and

http://shared.web.emory.edu/whsc/news/re...-mice.html

showing we atheists have those mutations ......making us ....

and that other thing i dont think i can post in the open but look in ur mailbox