(September 26, 2019 at 8:43 am)Aegon Wrote:(September 25, 2019 at 3:52 pm)possibletarian Wrote: Okay, so what are those reasons ?
And what other way of evaluation our universe should we use, what kind of justifiable thinking could we use ?
Well personally I think there's going to be a limit on how much we can understand about our universe, since our brains are made for survival not to see reality as it really is. We're not there yet, obviously.
But you guys are acting like physics is done. As if we understand everything so well we can definitively rule out these things... meanwhile, scientific research has made little progress on explaining consciousness. I think you guys are far too confident in our ability to explain us. I think you're acting almost unscientific in your dismissal of the probability of discovering new things about how we operate, and if there really is anything more to us that impacts the world around us besides what we already know. Again, I'm not saying that there is a soul - I'm saying you guys are giving our understanding of ourselves far too much credit right now, and I think it's worth leaving a bit of wiggle room because, at the end of the day, each of us has a subjective experience we have yet to create an accurate formula to explain. I still don't know what consciousness is and why it happens. Do you?
Don't put me in the boat with Christians, like Succumb or whatever just did. I respect scientific theory. It's the best method of getting as close as possible to objective truths. And I'm saying I don't think we've progressed enough for you to be so confident in your answers.
What type of thinking? Hmmm... maybe I should have worded that better. In the same way it takes a different "type" of thinking to think of things in quantum as opposed to classical... I'm sure there will be another "type" of thinking required to understand the next level. I don't think quantum mechanics is the end. Do you?
My point here is that I think there is potential for a type of "soul" - not the soul touted by Judeo-Christian types - that we will eventually understand through scientific means, and we're not there yet.
But none of that actually answers the questions put to you.
Sure there's lots more to learn, but when you make say there is a good reason not to be confident in something then it's reasonable for a person to ask what that reason is. If it's simply an opinion or feeling that's fine too, so long as it is clear that it is such.
If the answer is it will take a new kind of thinking and looking at things in a way that cannot be defined, then where does that leave us ? What does that even mean ?
Science never dismisses things (though individual scientists might) it collects information.To say someone is being unscientific or close minded when you can't offer any information, or give any clue as to what this new type of thinking is that you claim we would need in order to understand something that you can't define is bizarre.
'Those who ask a lot of questions may seem stupid, but those who don't ask questions stay stupid'