Jump to content

beecee

Senior Members
  • Posts

    6127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Everything posted by beecee

  1. I look at progression from a moral and objective angle. That which is new and so called progressive, is not necessarily morally superior to some older established moral stance. I totally agree with those sentiments, and while it maybe difficult to have a segregated sections for transgenders, perhaps that is just something we must accept. Although as I said, our NRL does have catagorisations for disability people with strict expert categories within that category. What I mean by difficult for transgenders, obviously is in refeence to how many there are that want to compete.
  2. All I did was quote from the following article....https://iai.tv/articles/common-sense-leads-philosophy-astray-auid-2075 by Marcus Arvan....Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Tampa. The evidence and data for modern thermodynamics and atomic theory has overridden and made it obsolete.
  3. Already clarified. Your coin analogy is just that, an analogy, and most understand the limitations of most analogies. And no one has said they dislike philsophy, afterall it is the foundation stone of science. It seems your own often expressed bias and usual cherry picking as exposed by others, has blinkered you to their interpretation regarding philosophy. Or read Krauss'book. The logical fallacy re an appeal to authority, is relevant when for example, asking a butcher his opinion of brain surgery. Otherwise of course we all appeal to authority at sometime or other, you, me and the bloke next door. Yes, I'm reasonably sure it is attributed to Berty. I havn't the time or the inclination to investigate any further. Good for you! I joined because I love science, and have learnt more and more regarding many areas of science I was ignorant about, from my peers. I was enthusiastic certainly not arrogant. I also learnt that in essence philosophy while being the foundation stone of science, does have limitations, faults and riddled with absurdities as expressed by Dicky Feynman. “We can’t define anything precisely. If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers… one saying to the other: you don’t know what you are talking about! The second one says: what do you mean by ‘talking’? What do you mean by ‘you’? What do you mean by ‘know’?” (The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol.1, 1963). Which is why we all need to appeal to authority at one time or another. To expand...an appeal to the "proper" authorities, while not proof, is evidence to support a particular case. It can be substantial evidence that puts a particular case beyond reasonable doubt. eg: Evidence for evolution, (so much so, that it is now considered fact) evidence for BH's...evidence for water on Mars. Of course neither is set in stone. I interprete Krauss, Degrasse-Tyson and Feynman, as simply expressing (at least with the first two) that areas of thought that once was the exclusive domain of philsophers, is now covered and treated by science. Feynman criticises then the absurdities that sometimes philosophy and philsophers seem to go. I see much validity in both points.
  4. What's wrong with progressivism? Absolutely nothing!! In fact it is a desired aspect ofr any and all progressive societies. We have elections in Australia this Saturday and we have the present tired old conservative government now playing politics and claiming now is not the time for change, against the Labor party, the party that gave us probably the best universal health scheme in the world, compulsory employer and employee contributing superannuation, general wage growth instead of stagnation, and a party for the people, leaving no one behind. The party I have been presently handing out leaflets for and have been a member of. But progressivnism like political correctnness can reach a stage of going mad and silly and shooting themselves in the foot in the progress.
  5. I'm pretty good hearted, and I believe as fair as anyone should be, along of course with the reality of the situation at hand. 😉 Absolutely although probably closer to 95%. Just to add that in Australia's NRL, (national rugby league) we do have the WNRL, and that is proving ever more popular and is aired prior to our men's match of the day. Our junior league is as I have already said, mixed with boys and girls playing together until about the age of 10 or so and when puberty is reached and boys start becoming stronger, faster and more durable. They are sorted by size, maturity, as well as age. Similar to weight for age with horse racing. The NRL also have a disability foremat in a similar vane for those that desire in that category . Define "brutal sports? Note: We had an International cricketer hit in the neck by a rising bouncer and later died.https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2281925-phillip-hughes-dies-at-age-25-after-being-struck-by-cricket-ball Can't really speak for the transgendered, but most woment already live with the status quo with regards to women and sport, with no problems at all. Know SFA about American football, but both the superior codes of Rugby League and Rugby Union, have womens sides, both amateur and professionals for those wanting to play. In recent times with mixed sex playing junior Rugby, a weight for age system applies, based on size, maturity and age. Once puberty is reached and surpassed, though it goes by age alone, up to the professional ranks and then its only segregation by sex, male or female. Or both. I once participated, now I am a spectator.
  6. Your choice, scenario is OK with me, but still invalid for obvious reasons. Your 80 year old women, (poor old dear) or if you like an 80 year old man,( poor old bastard) is simply an example and validation of remarks I have made now in a couple of threads, with regards to political correctness being taken too far...from the sublime to the ridiculious.
  7. It was the answer. Can you say fact? Good. So let's drop the American black issue and the 1930's racial segregation in America. Of course you do, you are just playing one-upmanship. Again..... I think we have many examples of sport bringing mankind together, the Olympic games being the prime example. And in more recent times, the Invictus games. And certainly no more of a stretch then your comment, "the rest of mankind"
  8. Testing for sporting prowess and capabilities (as you say) automatically sort those valid "divisions" out, in sports where the male natural phyisicality demands segregation. Other sports not so much so most certainly. It is an observational fact that generally speaking, men would have a biological advantage in certain sports that women could not overcome. It logically follows then that segregation is the right choice. Did you note the example I gave with junior rugby league and union in Australia, and the non segregation up to a certain age? And of course to add to that is the valid segregation of professional and amateur sprtsman and women. Is that really a valid analogy? Even as a young man, I would never had hopped into the ring with Joe Frazier. I was never a professional boxer, first and foremost, and would never have the capabilities to stand even stand a chance...as that poor 80 year old women you chose to throw into the ring. No I don't, other then they still went to war against a common enemy, when the need arose. With the segregation in America, I would say that this has improved somewhat since the 1930"s? Not perfect by any means and as with our own indigenous population, plenty more work and effort to be done to achieve full equality. But are we not now off topic? As I said....I'm not sure how many people were tuned to the Olympic games either, but a reasonably large number I suggest. And I'm rather confident that the sportsmanship and friendliness between those two remarkable women champions, was duly noted and appreciated and reflected on by that reasonably large number of viewers. Now you of course can reflect on the bad and negative side of sporting competiton, as much as you like, ( we can find that in any endeavour) but sporting competitions will continue as always, and the associated rivalry, friendship etc will continue and blossom. I don't believe we have had any wars over sport yet, or the fact that one competitor beat another from another country. Sport of course can also be used as a lever against unprovoked aggression and invasion, as per Russia and Putin invading the Ukraine. Sport along with other means is being used as punishment and as a disinsentive.
  9. Are you saying that someone of female gender would qualify to get in the ring with the world heavy weight boxing champion? Or qualify to play professional rugby league or union with larger, stronger, faster males? Testing for sporting prowess and capabilities (as you say) automatically sort those valid "divisions" out, in sports where the male natural phyisicality demands segregation. Mankind is not perfect. There are "mad" people out there, criminals, evil arseholes. The American Jesse Owens, helped by Long, showed the Hitler philsophy for what it was...bunkum. The vast majority of the world united agaainst that bunkum. I'm not sure how many people were tuned to the Olympic games either, but a reasonably large number I suggest. And I'm rather confident that the sportsmanship and friendliness between those two remarkable women champions, was duly noted and appreciated and reflected on by that reasonably large number of viewers.
  10. It is an artlcle from physorg, but I certainly have no objection if mods see it more condusive to another section or the lounge...which I was toying with anyway.
  11. 100% correct!!! I just want that revealed and validated before I kick the bucket. 😉 I'm not really sure of the actual figures and certainly do not dispute yours. I will say though that the other 90% mostly rather mundane glitches weather phenomena and light trickery, mistaken for alien controlled aircraft, is why so many are more cynical of the 10% you talk about. Not sure if you have expressed your feelings on the school children in the Zimbabwe incident yet?
  12. I'm really not sure what you are on about. Segregation of male and female in sports that require muscle strength, mass and size, are to protect the female from harm. Other sports such as darts, horse riding perhaps, see other qualities and human properties that support the concept of male and female playing together. Another segregating factor is amateurism and professionalism. I'm certainly not going to get in the ring with the world heavy weight boxxing champion...nor for that matter, with the world feather weight champion. As I mentioned earlier in Australia, junior rugby league is played with a mixture of sexes up until the ages of 10 or so. From there though, as puberty takes hold and males get bigger and stronger, they have separate competitions, as obviously they should. No I havn't really read all of this thread, just popped in on occasions to express what I see as logic and common sense.
  13. I think we have many examples of sport bringing mankind together, the Olympic games being the prime example. And certainly no more of a stretch then your comment, "the rest of mankind" https://stacker.com/stories/4096/30-examples-sports-bringing-world-together Probably the greatest swimmer ever, the Americal Kate Ledecky after being beaten by Australia's Arriane Titmus at the last Olympics.
  14. Considering that we have been noting these UFO's/UAP's for quite a while now, I would think (if they were aliens) that it would be time to stop and introduce themselves. An advanced civilisation doing research and observing us is an interesting possiblity, but by the same token, I'm sure they would have noted some intelliegnce with us humans, and like the Vulcans in Star Trek, stop and introduce themselves. The analogy of us to ants on an ant hill isn't really valid in my opnion. The most important thing with UFO's and UAP's is that they (a small percentage) remain unidentified. That of course includes Alien controlled craft.
  15. Yes, you can add that to the list also. My number one wish before I kick the bucket, is that the extraordinary confirmation of ETL is found and validated as such. Why shouldn't the standards be very high, considering it would be answering mankind's greatest question? Oparin - Haldane theory' Abiogenisis.
  16. They certainly are applying the scientific method, and with Krauss and Degrasse-Tyson, simply recognising the fact that areas that were once solely the domain of philsophers, are now the domain of scientists. Or as another great scientist once said...... “We can’t define anything precisely. If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers… one saying to the other: you don’t know what you are talking about! The second one says: what do you mean by ‘talking’? What do you mean by ‘you’? What do you mean by ‘know’?” (The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol.1, 1963). Dicky is often quoted for his dislike of philosophy, (although again like Krauss and Degrasse-Tyson) I see it more as statements of having had its day as far as science is concerned) He often in quotes attributed to him, highlights the absurdities of philosophy, as highlighted above. He is known for his often humouress remarks, about the dopey and foolish exersises in linguistic sophistry, as practised by philsophers. (some) Your comment on Bertrand Russell is ironic at best, considering that he is described as a British philosopher, logician, and social critic. (WIKI) In essence we are all philsophers to some extent, but in reality, mostly poor philsophers.
  17. The best we can do is say that conditions exist or once did exist, to support the existence and evolution of life, as we know it. Not until we discover an undeniable Alien relic or fossil, ascertain undeniable constructions such as cities, bridges, or vehicles, or of course actual physical contact, can we be really certain. Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
  18. Yes, I remeber you expressing that erronious opinion in another thread. As I expressed more fully earlier.....
  19. Good points, mostly and I don't disagree, but sometimes philosophy can be taken to the nth degree. An example? The notion/philosophy of Trump and company, as well as a couple of political ratbags in Australia, using the rights of individual freedoms to chose for ourselves, over riding the edicts and mandates of heath authorities to make vaccinations compulsory in certain industries, and conveneintly ignoring that their actions could well be detrimental to other innocent parties. I accept that philosophy lays the ground work and foundations of which science has been built. I do not under-estimate its value. But in many areas that once were pure philosophy, are now covered by science/cosmology/physics. Bertrand Russell writes: "Philosophy…is something intermediate between theology and science. Like theology, it consists of speculations on matters as to which definite knowledge has, so far, been unascertainable; but like science, it appeals to human reason rather than to authority…All definite knowledge—so I should contend—belongs to science; all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. But between theology and science there is a No Man’s Land, exposed to attack on all sides; this No Man’s Land is philosophy. The real question is not whether philosophical arguments based on commonsense are deeply fallible, but rather what the takeaway lesson is. What are our philosophical options given the fallibility of commonsense, and which option is best?" from.....https://iai.tv/articles/common-sense-leads-philosophy-astray-auid-2075 Certainly not science, but in areas certain aspects of philsophy are now in the domain of science. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/04/has-physics-made-philosophy-and-religion-obsolete/256203/ Krauss also is not Robinson Crusoe in his criticism of philsophy...Degrasee Tyson is another, and also the late great Richard Feynman. Krauss'remarks though certainly drew heaps of criticism, and I would add, probably also increased the sales of his book, "A Universe from Nothing" My take is he wasn't totally rubbishing philsophy, (other then one particular philsopher) but discussing and pointing out its limitations and the areas now covered by physics and science. Yes. hence my remark about me being around science forums for too long.
  20. Then you would agree that like science, it has been shown to bring mankind together in friendship as well as competition.
  21. Of course they need to segregate, when the skills of that sport, favour the male, such as strength muscle etc. And of course we have and always will have professional and amateur sport. People, men and women, with the necessary skills to take them to the top of their game/sport, deserve and rightly chose to make a living out of it. Have you ever played sport?
  22. I recently came upon an oldish (2015) "physorg" article, that some may like to discuss......(The title by the way, is the title of a book by Jimena Canales) The artlcle... https://phys.org/news/2015-05-science-historian-story-einstein-dangerous.html Two of the 20th century's greatest minds, one of them physicist Albert Einstein, came to intellectual blows one day in Paris in 1922. Their dispute, before a learned audience, was about the nature of time - mostly in connection with Einstein's most famous work, the theory of relativity..... extracts: The philosopher in the title, and Einstein's adversary that day, was Henri Bergson, a French philosopher who was much more famous at the time than the German-born Einstein. Einstein quickly dismissed the philosopher's criticism. To an audience that day of mostly philosophers, he made the incendiary statement that "the time of the philosophers does not exist." It was Einstein's ideas that gained prominence, however, in part because later research only reinforced the science of relativity, but also because Bergson was effectively discredited by scientists, Canales said. Outside of philosophy, Bergson has been largely forgotten and is rarely even mentioned in Einstein biographies. Being against science in the modern world, "makes no sense," she said. "Clearly we should be for science." much more at link............................. the book and the author.................. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691173177/the-physicist-and-the-philosopher ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: The article concludes....But we also need to think about science critically, Canales said. "We're not taught to see science as it really is, as it really is practiced, as it really is done." She said she hopes her book might help scientists and others understand the place of science "in more realistic terms." It's this final bit I'm having trouble to accept. Why aren't we taught to see science as it really is? and as it really is practised? I see the results of how it is and how it is practised everyday. Or have I been around science forums for too long? 😉 My views/opinions on philsophers and philsophising is well known and essentially aligns with the Lawrence Krauss and Neil Degrasse Tyson interpretations and views, and can be summed up with the quote that science is what we know:philsophy is what we don't know by Bertrand Russell.
  23. Hi Moontanman. I have only watched the first video thus far, and what I do and always have supported is the further investigations into the small percentage of those UFO's/UAP's that have no known explanation at that time. I also have certainly not gone into this subject with as much vigour as you have and am really only aware of a few of the more prominent ones. Certainly the couple highlighted in the first video, and the much discussed Nimitz sightings, do not really raise my interest too much, or change my feelings that at this time, we have no "extraordinary evidence" of Alien visitations or contact. To my mind, so far the most unexplainable incident remains that of the Story of Children in Zimbabwe Encountering a UFO and Alien beings. I would certainly like to see more official investigations into that incident. My general feelings though have not changed, in that as a great man once said, "ëxtraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence", and the fact that the two prohibitive aspects preventing Alien/interstellar/galactic content, are time and distance. https://phys.org/news/2022-05-congress-ufos-extraterrestrials.html
  24. This will make you happy........
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.