Is Science a value system?

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Magical Realist, Jan 15, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I understand but disagree

    Let me put it this way , it helps to understand you , generally
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,706
    LOL! Not a useful thing to me. I rely on maps, road signs, and compasses.

    That UFOs exist or not doesn't improve my life either. Not that astronomers would ever jeopardize their careers by admitting they exist anyway.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,706
    My self-concept doesn't relate to the constellations or names of stars that men have contrived.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Understood

    But the these stars have energy
     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,706
    Stars are only the object of astronomical study. They aren't the result of astronomy. Like the earth isn't the result of the science of geology. The map, iow, is not the territory.
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    True

    Stars still have internal energy moving outward
     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,706
    As does the Sun, the earth, the atmosphere, the sea, a candle by a dark window, and the restless human soul. But that's getting into metaphysics and prose now, not science. These are personal philosophical values I project onto reality. MY form of spirituality or metaphorical life so to speak.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,421
    Moderator note: dumbest man on earth has been banned from participating in this thread for one week. This is on account of his trolling of paddoboy.
     
  12. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    It is not about metaphysics

    It is about science

    What though if these values are not quite right ?
     
  13. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    Shit happens. Don't worry about it.

    I actually was trying to remember when I posted some of that and only discovered the error when a quote link took me to a whole different discussion.
     
  14. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Is this evaluation , just, ?

    As in justified
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    This is in the first place a science forum. Not a play ground, and not to use for personal vendettas. And people should stay on topic river. So, any questions about science and the many great advantages to mankind?
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543


    And all are explained by science. Are you saying that science in revealing that the earth is not flat, that the Universe is not geocentric, that we are not the center of any creation, nor the center of the galaxy, has not benefited mankind?
    That's being deliberately obtuse.
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,421
    DMOE posted nothing on the topic. He posted only to try to bait paddoboy. His posts were reported. A moderator (which happened to be me) acted on the reports, based on an analysis of the thread content.

    Members are free to decide for themselves whether this was a justified response or not.
     
  18. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    One wild card variable that can make science subjective is connected to human invention. Humans are able to make synthetic things and generate synthetic conditions, which do not exist in the universe, apart from humans. One will not find natural teflon or natural heart transplants. The existence of these, even though contrived makes them part of the universe, at some level. Sometimes theory crosses the bridge.

    For example, particle accelerator data needs human invention and contrivances to generate data you can't see directly in nature. If we could generate this data under extreme gravitational pressure, the results would be different since pressure tends to cause phase changes. We will not see these phase changes under the low laboratory gravitational pressure conditions we use in the accelerators. The net result is the data may only apply under very specific conditions and may not be the rule of the universe.

    Material properties have temperature, pressure and even concentration dependency with high energy and low pressure only a small section of any larger phase diagram. Below is a phase diagram of water. Water is not uniform across the board but changes properties with temperature/energy as pressure changes. The accelerators sort of look at the x-axis but miss most of the natural graph above the axis such as the extreme pressure early universe.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,421
    wellwisher:

    It's not clear from your post what you think you'd expect to see in accelerator experiments under pressure that is different from what they observe at present.

    More to the point, it is not clear what your post has to do with science as a value system. Please explain the relevance.
     
  20. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Another good / correct posts wellwisher, but as James just noted, the tie to science's value system is vague, but I think exists, as our values are based on only what we can know. If the "old wellwisher" does not return soon, I'll turn in my badge as "Sheriff of Nonsense."

    To your comments and especially the upward sloping boundary between VI & liquid, I add that is why most of the Earth's core is liquid, not solid as many believe. The solid inner most core is no bigger than the moon, but very slowly growing. - Its all in the phase diagram as you say.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    As the Earth cools, the solid core will grow larger:
    *That dominates the conduction cooling of the core, which would not give earth a protective magnetic field, without which there would be no "scientific value system" as there would be no scientists..
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2015
  21. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    Without at least the most obvious astronomical observations and rudimentary astronomy, our forebears would not have been able to determine the right time of year to plant or harvest their crops. The fact that they were able to do so was a survival imperative, without which smaller, scattered human settlements might never have been able to successfully increase their food supplies, and might literally have starved to death. One of Magical Realist's ancestors might have been one of those who perished.

    The Aztecs sacrificed a human each day to their sun god Huitzilopotchli. Otherwise, the sun might not rise. They probably didn't value astronomy very much, but they did have a fairly good calendar. Modern calendars even throw in a leap second every 400 years or so. If they did not, eventually summer would happen in January. Likely no one would even remember why it shouldn't be. Granted, there are a lot of seconds in six months. Eventually, the calendar would straighten itself out again. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    Without extremely refined observational astronomy the way we are able to do it in the 21st century, we could not receive early warning of incoming asteroids before they strike the Earth, or even predict where large chunks of space debris from rocket launches and satellites will be when we launch more, to say nothing of warning us about solar flares that might affect the operation of telecommunications satellites valued at tens of millions of dollars, facilitating communications on internet connections like this one, among other things. If Magical Realist believes this part of science to be of no value, well that's just a shame.

    Astronomy is useful. It is philosophy that consistently fails the test of being useful in any way. And it's been that way for millennia.
     
    krash661 likes this.
  22. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,514
    I'm not sure I quite agree with that. I think that the philosophy of science is actually very useful, in helping us get clear what we are achieving in science and how to distinguish a scientific way of thinking from one that is not, and hence to separate science from other systems of thought, such as religion.
     
  23. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,706
    You tell me. How has any of that knowledge benefited mankind? Once again, it's simply facts. And facts are value-neutral until someone gives them value.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page