- Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:00 am
#34781
"reality", as used by little wannabe faux. More bullshit.
Sorry, science makes an assumption about the philosophical term "reality". It assumes the objective physical world is real, physical, and objectively observable. Then it makes observations of that assumed physical reality, makes models, makes predictions based on those models, compares the predictions to the objective observations, modifies the modesl to fix the observations, iterates, discusses, tests, and moves to finer and finer details.
Science has no legitimate statement about any alternate realities not covered by the assumed phjysical and objectively observable reality.
On a purely philosophical level, there is only one philosophical certainty. "I think, therefor I am". The rest is conjecture.
Most scientists are totally unaware of any philosophical nature to science. They are imbedded in the purely physical assumptions of the philosophy of science. The assumption of the physical reality as a reality. The existence of an objectively observable universe with "simple" deductible rules. Observations, models, predictions, testing. It seems to work very well.
"Denier Science" is outside these assumptions and methodologies. Just as science can not legitimately say anything about alternate non-physical realities. The alternate realities of "denier science" can not be used to counter science. To counter science, one must use the methods of science and the assumptions of an objectively observable universe.
Now, I must admit, when I use the word delusions I am referring to the arguments about physical reality that are bas3ed outside the realm of science, the physical world, objectivity, rationality, logic, and any physically testable reality. In your non-physical, non-objective world they may have some reality.