(March 22, 2019 at 10:19 am)bennyboy Wrote:(March 22, 2019 at 9:54 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: That you defaulted to bitching about science after failing to present a single example of anything that belonged in the metaphysical or immaterial set is a matter of historical record, all one needs to do is go back a couple pages to see how this all began, Benny.
Nobody's "bitching" about science. I don't bitch about a hammer because it can't turn a screw.
(March 22, 2019 at 9:54 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Whether or not there are questions that science isn't well suited to answer is immaterial to whether or not there is anything in the metaphysical or immaterial sets. There may be, though it would be interesting to see how a person would know that or what those questions are, but if so that won't certify that there was a metaphysical answer or immaterial answer or that anything belonged in either of -those- sets.Stop talking about my mom's socks.
Notice that the "immaterial" is defined in terms of what it is not, namely "not material" as opposed to what it is, which no one knows, let alone define. For instance, if we posses souls/or spirits that cause the electrons in our brains to move, then the Conservation laws (namely, energy, momentum and angular momentum) are false.