hijack from Philosophy, Science & Reality

[Jasper10]

On 5/21/2017 at 4:17 PM, Randolpin said:

This topic talks about the relationship of philosophy, science and reality.

I will expound it thru questions:

1. Is philosophy more advance than science in understanding reality because it can form ideas even when there is no experiments performed or observations (While science on the other hand can't step forward because it relies on data)?

2. Is philosophy always correct? Are there instance that science prove philosophy?If philosophy always correct, we can rely solely to philosophy than science.

3. Is philosophy as accurate as science?

4. When can we say that a question become philosophical? Can we say that philosophy is an advance science? If yes then we can conclude that the only task of science is to prove philosophy ( is it correct?).

 

I hope you understand my points. If you need clarifications, just ask me. Thank you...

In answer to your first question it is my opinion that that philosophy is far superior to science.Mainstream science  just thinks it knows best…it doesn’t.

Mainstream science is wrong and failing because it adopts a half philosophy that it has no way of definitively proving.

Half philosophy science suits secular scientists though because it pampers to their hopeful belief systems.All they have is hope you see like everyone else.

If you let unaware secular scientists loose with science it will all go belly up and it has.

Secular scientist don’t even understand consciousness and yet a child could understand it.

What mainstream scientist don’t get is you have to adopt “player” science to understand consciousness.You can’t understand it with “spectator” science.

Its the “easy problem” in “player” science and not the “hard problem”.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Jasper10

[iNow]

Had to necro a 4 year old thread to keep grinding that axe of yours, eh?

[StringJunky]

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

Had to necro a 4 year old thread to keep grinding that axe of yours, eh?

With rubbish.