0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
How can the mental that's irreducible to the physical or to the material be inherited physiologically ? how ? via some sort of materialist magic ?The inheritance of certain mental illnesses ,for example, cannot be just the work, so to speak, of genes or epigenetics ,simply because the mental is irreducible to the physical or to the material : there might be some extra form of inheritance of the mental out there thus
...
I was not talking about any psychic phenomena ...
" Science and psychic phenomena : the fall of the house of skeptics " By Chris Carter*
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ] Parapsychology and the Skeptics: A Scientific Argument for the Existence of ESP by Chris CarterForeword by Rupert Sheldrake Ph.D
Popper’s principle of falsification
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 27/11/2013 19:50:15...tl;drGood old Popper - a great clarifier. I studied his work as part of my degree. Not everyone agrees with his emphasis on falsifiability, but I've always used it as the litmus test of a scientific hypothesis or theory, and an acid test for pseudoscience.
So tell us, Don. What particular theories of our current 'false materialist meinstream(sic) "scientific world view "' do you find to be unfalsifiable?
Contrariwise, how might any of the assertions you've been making about consciousness and the immaterial be falsified
I'm bewildered to say the least.Don, you post a criticism of theories that make vague and therefore irrefutable claims, which are unfalsifiable and untestable. Popper criticizes theories that have no evidence, or no evidence other than carefully selected observations which ignore contradictory evidence - theories that are speculations from which no predictions follow.
And you don't see how your concept of the immaterial has every single one of the flaws he described?
QuotePopper’s principle of falsificationThat old fraud KP and I received doctorates at the same ceremony, though his was honorary and mine was earned the hard way. "His" principle (it was actually taught in schools for years before he claimed to have invented it) is of falsifiability, not falsification. Hence the definitions of science and scientific knowledge that I gave you about 38 pages ago. How sad that you only accept them from a windbag philosopher instead of a working scientist who uses the stuff every day.
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 25/11/2013 19:52:10I was not talking about any psychic phenomena ...And then you quote from a book with the title ...
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 27/11/2013 19:50:15 " Science and psychic phenomena : the fall of the house of skeptics " By Chris Carter* [ * Not Chris X-Files Carter . Maybe Christopher David Carter will sell a few copies via mistaken identity ].PS are Chris [D] Carter and Rupert Sheldrake joined at the hip ? .
Quote from: amazon.com [ You are not allowed to view attachments ] Parapsychology and the Skeptics: A Scientific Argument for the Existence of ESP by Chris CarterForeword by Rupert Sheldrake Ph.D
Go back and read that carefully , my lady :What faslifiable verifiable 'evidence " has materialism been providing concerning the "fact " that all is ...matter? , and hence the mind is in the brain , or the mind is just brain's activity , memory is stored in the brain ....Materialism that tries to explain 'everything " , just in terms of physics and chemistry, including the mind thus , materialism that seems to be corroborated or rather verified by everything,and thus can be faslified by nothing , so it seems :
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 28/11/2013 18:09:23Go back and read that carefully , my lady :What faslifiable verifiable 'evidence " has materialism been providing concerning the "fact " that all is ...matter? , and hence the mind is in the brain , or the mind is just brain's activity , memory is stored in the brain ....Materialism that tries to explain 'everything " , just in terms of physics and chemistry, including the mind thus , materialism that seems to be corroborated or rather verified by everything,and thus can be faslified by nothing , so it seems : You're attributing a claim or goal to scientists that they do not themselves claim, and aren't even interested in - "explaining everything", or disproving the immaterial. There are about 26,000 current scientific journals that publish the results of experiments -- experiments that make specific, falsifiable predictions, just as your hero Popper says science should do. If you or someone could find a way to do the same with some aspect of the immaterial, I'm sure that one of them would them would gladly publish your results too.
Is the elusive physical so-called unified theory of "everything " = nothing not try to explain everything ,just in terms of physics and chemistry ?
Quote from: RD on 27/11/2013 23:42:18... are Chris [D] Carter and Rupert Sheldrake joined at the hip ? .So what ?
... are Chris [D] Carter and Rupert Sheldrake joined at the hip ? .
… we need to keep on developing and evolving our own human epistemology concerning the valid sources of knowledge
Many scientists regard the discipline as pseudoscience, saying that parapsychologists continue investigation despite not having demonstrated conclusive evidence of psychic abilities in more than a century of research.
In less than a century science progressed from the first powered flight to putting men on the moon.In less than a century science progressed from invention of a transistor to creating the computer you’re using now which has many millions of them. In less than a century science progressed from discovering the mechanism of inheritance to modifying it.