RE: Scientific knowledge versus spiritual knowledge
January 13, 2016 at 3:32 am
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2016 at 3:35 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(January 12, 2016 at 4:52 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(January 3, 2016 at 11:49 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: There's no such thing as "scientific" knowledge and "spiritual" knowledge. There is only knowledge. If you cannot support your claim, it isn't a special category of "knowledge"; it is an unsupported claim.
What the fuck? Yes there is such a thing as "scientific knowledge". You wouldn't be typing on this computer if there was not such a thing.
Now don't confuse the unknown future science has yet to explain as being equal to not knowing anything at all, that is simply flat out crap.
Science is the ONLY tool that can, when used ethically and correctly give us knowledge.
The rest are just competing opinions. Humans are certainly entitled to having them, but scientific method as a tool does not give on care as to what anyone's personal opinion is. Peer review is what settles differences in science, not opinions.
The only difference between you and me is that you insist on using an extraneous adjective. "Scientific knowledge" is redundant, not to mention repetitive.
Did you read my entire post, or just the first seven words?
(January 12, 2016 at 5:30 pm)Brian37 Wrote: [...] I simply don't think coddling them by allowing them all claims are equal is the way to do it.
Perhaps you'd do me the courtesy of quoting where I said that their claims are equal. I should have thought I made my point perfectly clear with my last sentence. You seem to have not read it ... or you're simply in an obdurate mood.
