RE: The Question of Why
December 27, 2011 at 3:08 pm
(This post was last modified: December 27, 2011 at 3:13 pm by Perhaps.)
There is a distinct difference between reason and purpose. Reason infers causality, while purpose infers meaning.
Causality is observed through science but will ultimately fall back on to inductive assumption of cause (committing a deductive fallacy) - This was the aim of my hypothesis. The most prominent image of this occurring is 'cogito ergo sum' - essentially 'this is true, therefore this is the cause'. This simply does not work if one is trying to deductively prove a cause. One cannot observe a conclusion and induce a cause and say it is proof of the cause. As any mathematician would tell you, it only takes one counter example to negate a proof, so while science may think it knows the cause, it may change at any time as knowledge grows. For examples of this occurring refer to any of the scientific revolutions of the past - the Copernican/Galilean revolution, the Newtonian (classical) revolution, the non-Euclidean and non-Aristotelian revolutions, the ongoing Gödelian revolution, the Relativity revolution, the Quantum revolution.
You can refer back to Aleialoura's posts for an explanation of purpose and meaning.
That's a question, not a statement.
Causality is observed through science but will ultimately fall back on to inductive assumption of cause (committing a deductive fallacy) - This was the aim of my hypothesis. The most prominent image of this occurring is 'cogito ergo sum' - essentially 'this is true, therefore this is the cause'. This simply does not work if one is trying to deductively prove a cause. One cannot observe a conclusion and induce a cause and say it is proof of the cause. As any mathematician would tell you, it only takes one counter example to negate a proof, so while science may think it knows the cause, it may change at any time as knowledge grows. For examples of this occurring refer to any of the scientific revolutions of the past - the Copernican/Galilean revolution, the Newtonian (classical) revolution, the non-Euclidean and non-Aristotelian revolutions, the ongoing Gödelian revolution, the Relativity revolution, the Quantum revolution.
You can refer back to Aleialoura's posts for an explanation of purpose and meaning.
(December 27, 2011 at 2:06 am)Welsh cake Wrote:(December 20, 2011 at 5:30 am)Perhaps Wrote: In other words, is there a statement that can withstand the question 'why?'?Why not?
That's a question, not a statement.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
