<p>
[QUOTE]
Okay, now I'm just repeating myself. IF the question is about truth, as opposed to simply how the visible, perceptible world functions, then it IS a weakness. It is a weakness that ALL paradigms are subject to. I don't mean to sound sharp, but you seem to be unable to grasp the concept that what you see, and what you feel, may not in fact be reality. After all, someone who suffers from a mental illness may see the world as one way...who's to say you, or I, or anyone, does not suffer from the very same illness? The argument between you and an equally strong-minded person would be akin to that of two patents suffering from schizophrenia, who both think they are Jesus. One would say, "I'm Jesus," and the other, "No...I'm Jesus!" But they would never be able to agree because they see things in different ways. (Sure the example is rather extreme, but it applies.)
[/QUOTE]
but science does acknowledge that what we directly sense isn't exactly what the world is like. the world isn't actually full of colors, it's a bunch of photons bouncing around that our brain perceives as color. science acknowledges the limits of our senses to bring about accurate information, which is why we have machines do most of the sensing for us.</p>
<p>science attempts to find truth about the applicable world. our senses and our machines may not convey reality, but then that just means the "real" reality is irrelevant to us. what we are able to feel IS our reality because it's all we can observe. anything we can't observe is as good as nonexistent. science doesn't attempt to find the truth about anything outside what we can sense. that's impossible. but yes, if you are looking for the WHOLE truth, science MAY not be able to bring that to you, but if that's the case, nothing can. so don't worry about it.</p>
<p>as for mentally disabled people, science can explain why they feel what they feel.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
So what you're saying is that we know because WE KNOW. That argument is fundamentally flawed. What's the value of knowing something that is GIVEN? Mathematics (spelling, less so) is a closed system. It is no more true than one's senses. Besides, getting into the question of "what do we know" requires defining "knowledge." After all, there is experiential knowledge and academic knowledge, knowledge with different degrees of belief involved, etc.
[/QUOTE]
using the colloquial definition, it's still knowledge. i cannot give you a rigorous definition of knowledge</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
I wasn't arguing either. It was a disclaimer. You just seem to like to argue, but that's alright...so do I. In terms of the whole picture, sure, the two may be irreconcilable. I am in no way qualified enough in either field to dismiss it completely. But it also seems like neither rules out the other entirely, i.e. if anything in science is true, everything in the Bible is false, and vice-versa.
[/QUOTE]
of course if science is true not EVERYTHING in the bible is false. but the bible would be just like any other fictional book. they will have facts that overlap with what science has produced, but it's still fiction.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Lol, I was under the impression that this thread began with one question. Apparently not. That's fine: it just makes discussion a tad more difficult.
[/QUOTE]
the thread began with the question "are there lots of intellectual discussions at UCLA" or something. i don't think we'd want to talk about that now though </p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
But yeah, mr muffin, you seem like a passionate debater! This is fun! Let's just not let this get too heated or personal...I'm not looking for confrontation.
[/QUOTE]
boredom may have made me seem a little more passionate than i really am. and you sound like you think i might be mad at you... idiot</p>
<p>jkjk :P</p>