Re: A quest for surreality? -- Martial Arts Discussion Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 19:10:11 08/31/01 Fri
Author: Seven of Nine
Subject: Re: A quest for surreality?
In reply to: Goktimus Prime 's message, "A quest for surreality?" on 16:37:33 08/26/01 Sun

it comes down to one of defination. Pre-modern day sceince, concepts like Qi could have meant a whole lot of things that have not been defined in a scientific concept we have today. Nor could they, as their knowledge base is much less than ours. Accordingly, if we try to associate Qi with modern day understanding, it could mean a whole lot of things. This is because the growth of scientific kwnowldge has resulted in the branching off of fundamental ideas into their respective areas of specialisation. In the past - a Greek psysician might say, you've got an eye disease and may have a handful of treatment. Today, we would see a specialist who would have a library full of material on the eye.

However, there isn't such a thing a complete scientific knowledge by defination of science being an emperical study. There may by what we call paranormal phenomenon etc. where by the conditions for their occurance may not be synthesisable in the laboratory or that we may not have the observation tools to detect their presence.

For example if rain occurs one day in 1,000 years, and the rest of the days are sunny days. That freak event is no less "scientifc" then the other sunny days. However, if the measurement was set up during those sunny days - it doesn't disprove the existance of rain!

there are also sub atomic particles that have been theoritically postulated to exist that have yet to be detected. Although some of these have been as our tools of measurement improved. However, their existance has to be inferred mathemathical means or deduced from other known forms of interaction.

However, it is hard to do this with the paranormal. Take for example Ghost, what do you define as a ghost? Clearly, the same type of manfistation from the point of view of the person who "sees" a ghost could be a) pyschological imbalance 2) hallucination - due to lack of sleep 3) holographic projection 4) or other.....

Now the or other catagory can be any number of things. Given that science is emperical, it can elimate any number of "known factors" but it does help to know what science has to look for. It cannot do that unless the event - to some extent is adequately defined for its existance to be proved or disproved.

The again, there are plain old liers who are out to sell a story! See you later - (beam me up Tuvak)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

you are wrong about mooncake -- blah, 00:56:27 11/22/02 Fri

You missed my point... -- Goktimus Prime, 16:46:34 11/22/02 Fri

Re: You missed my point... -- OneDragons, 04:12:59 12/19/02 Thu
- poetic comparisons -- Goktimus Prime, 15:26:47 12/20/02 Fri
  - Re: poetic comparisons -- OneDragons, 18:31:30 12/20/02 Fri