RE: Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic
March 18, 2018 at 1:56 pm
(This post was last modified: March 18, 2018 at 2:00 pm by I_am_not_mafia.)
(March 18, 2018 at 9:03 am)SteveII Wrote: I know philosophy is hard. But you should really learn some if you want to discuss things past a middle-school level. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
Yeah, you're saying that to a doctor of philosophy. Doesn't mean to say that I don't recognise bollocks when I see it.
Rather than a wikipedia link, I'll give you a scientific paper to read.
'The scientific status of artificial life' by J Noble.
This is an excellent paper written at the beginning of the new scientific field of Artificial Life that gave focus to why people should be researching it.
The premise of Artificial Life is 'life as it could be',. Jason Noble argued that simulations cannot prove theories concerning the real world. All they can do is test whether hypotheses are logically consistent. Simulations are not a tool for empirical study. Once you think you have come up with a good model, you still need to apply it to the real world to see if it's correct.
This is precisely what you are not doing. Both computer simulations that run on logic, and logical arguments have the same characteristic. GIGO. Garbage In Garbage Out.
If it does not apply to the real world in some way then it has no use. You may think that you are doing philosophy but you're not. You're just trying to fool yourself and others into believing some made up fantasy.
