Hey Veeky Forums, Veeky Forums here...

Hey Veeky Forums, Veeky Forums here, how do stemmies feel about the fact that their beliefs are as provable as any religion? Almost every single 'rule' and 'method' in your shit field involves fully abstract,non-physical, man-made concepts that were created only a few thousand years ago. All of science and mathematics basically equates to the manipulation of abstract concepts via abstract processes to produce more abstract concepts. This is most evident by the fact that stemmies insist upon the existence of "atoms." which are supposedly everywhere and make up everything (even the air) yet there is not one picture or image of any atom anywhere. How are stemmies so presumptuous and self-centered that they believe 6the universe, which is infinitely unknowable and infinitely aged, is governed by man-made, abstract concepts like the Greek alphabet or Arabic numbers? Stemmies claim that the universe (and everything within the universe) literally is governed Greek, Latin, and Arabic symbols put together. Not only that, they also claim that processes such as basic movement, (physics) and fire, (chemistry) ancient and basic things that have been around since forever are governed and regimented by Semitic trading runes and Mediterranean triangles manipulated to create "formulas" most of which haven't even been around for 500 years.

Other urls found in this thread:

physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/jul/16/electron-microscope-sees-single-hydrogen-atoms
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Stemmies insist upon the existence of "atoms"

Atomic theory predicts measurements.

>Stemmies claim that the universe (and everything within the universe) literally is governed Greek, Latin, and Arabic symbols put together.

Your post is Latin characters concatenated with each other. Dismissed.

>Your post is Latin characters concatenated with each other.
>Abstract concepts combined to create abstract meanings in a human-being's subjective mind is somehow comparable to the process by which physicists and chemists claim natural laws are governed, that is, according to completely abstract concepts.

>Atomic theory predicts measurements.
Correlation does not equal causation stemmie, if the mere existance of something as supposedly basic and omnipresent as an atom is unprovable, then that means there are serious problems in your "logic."
>A lightning bolt struck the tree! That means Zeus exists!

>>Abstract concepts combined to create abstract meanings in a human-being's subjective mind is somehow comparable to the process by which physicists and chemists claim natural laws are governed, that is, according to completely abstract concepts.

A word salad.

I mean, I'm getting a BA too but this is just wrong.

The natural processes that are modeled by the math in physics and chemistry were always there even when the math wasnt, sure, but that math allows for prediction and measurement of those processes to the t.

Sure, the ideas are abstract, but they are not disconnected or unrelated to the natural world, because they allow us to manipulate it.

Shit taste in philosophy, btw

>He doesn't know what "correlation" is.

>the universe is infinitely aged
brainlet pls

Also:

>Liking Max Stirner even though individualist egoism folds in on itself when it becomes obvious that joining and adhering to groups can be a worthwhile egoistic goal.

>Being smug at literally anybody for any philosophical presuppositions they hold.

Observed reality is the axiom, it doesnt matter whether its "true" or not

>I don't understand you.
>therefore you are wrong.
I didn't originally buy into the stemmie autism meme. Originally.
>The natural processes that are modeled by the math in physics and chemistry were always there even when the math wasnt,
So you're saying the universe was guided by a system of deltas, thetas, ones, twos, A's and B's before these concepts were even created?

>He thinks joining groups, organizations and communes is directly in conflict with Max Stirner's philosophy.
Stirner did not object to these things, he objected to action based on abstract and entirely fake concepts simply BECAUSE you were apart of these communities. Communities and groups are a means to an end that hold no sacred or spiritual relevance other than continuing human survival, any other concepts of "superiority" such as being god's chosen people is fake.

>Observed reality is the axiom
If that's the case, why can't atoms be observed?

>why can't atoms be observed
They can be in all sorts of ways

>mfw OP will never have a real job

Hurr durr relationships describing reality are not dependent on the symbols used to describe it, they are dependent on reality hurr durr

Muh epistemology
Muh empiricism
Muh predictive power
Muh advancement of the human race

"History" is a manifestation of an infinitely unknowable set of data which is understood through the manmade symbols that survived up until this point.

Back to summerfag

>So you're saying the universe was guided by a system of deltas, thetas, ones, twos, A's and B's before these concepts were even created?

The processes and mechanics through which the universe works existed before they were modeled by humans, yes.

>"How can Zeus be observed?"
>"He can be in many ways, he is the lightning that scorches the Earth in times of storms, that is Zeus, and that is Zeus's power that we see on Earth!"
>"How do I know that this is because of Zeus? I need to see Zeus with my own eyes for me to fully know that he is responsible for this."
>"REEEEEEEEEEE"

The same concept. Unless you have an actual image of an atom doing what atoms are said to do, you have no proof of an atom existing.

Nice projection stemmie. How do you know I'm not in Law school preparing to represent my client when I sue you for all the rights to all of the work you've done? How do you know I'm not going to be a stockbroker who fucks all of your investments and ruins you while you're on the verge of retirement? How do you know I'm not going to become a politician that can hamper or even put a full stop to your work and livelihood as I please? Your stemmie illusions are very entertaining.

>a manifestation of an infinitely unknowable set of data which is understood through the manmade symbols that survived up until this point.
Not so fast stemmie, it seems you forgot to understand the basic difference between objective and subjective reality! You see, language, literacy, and meaning derived from them is entirely subjective and therefore abstract. It's an observable and highly recorded fact that humans put down their experiences to paper or parchment, tablet or wax. Through interpreting the subjective meaning created with subjective concepts using our own reasoning, we can form "history." No historian claims that a history book can cause a fire to light or a planet to move. That's why "science" is more similar to theology and religion than history, because it claims things that can never be proved.

You don't seem to be getting it. If the universe is something that has existed for billions of years before humans, why are they said to work according to abstract human concepts? Sound familiar?

>How do you know I'm not in Law school preparing to represent my client when I sue you for all the rights to all of the work you've done? How do you know I'm not going to be a stockbroker who fucks all of your investments and ruins you while you're on the verge of retirement? How do you know I'm not going to become a politician that can hamper or even put a full stop to your work and livelihood as I please? Your stemmie illusions are very entertaining.

because you are posting here in Veeky Forums

All we ever have is observation and interpretation

>why are they said to work according to abstract human concepts
The universe doesnt work according to human abstractions, we make abstractions in an attempt to describe how the universe works

WEW LAD
E
W

L
A
D

>This is most evident by the fact that stemmies insist upon the existence of "atoms." which are supposedly everywhere and make up everything (even the air) yet there is not one picture or image of any atom anywhere.
Literally 5 seconds of google later... [physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/jul/16/electron-microscope-sees-single-hydrogen-atoms that's based on Nature 454, 319-322 (17 July 2008)]

>How are stemmies so presumptuous and self-centered that they believe 6the universe, which is infinitely unknowable and infinitely aged, is governed by man-made, abstract concepts like the Greek alphabet or Arabic numbers?

It's not so much 'governed' as 'explained by'. For example you would'nt say that the word 'eat' defines the consumption of food, it's just an arbitrary sound in a arbitrary language that correspends to the action we asscoiate with consumption of food. Same way in science, you may use θ to represent the angle (in radians) a wheel travels in 1 second. Now, all the units are arbitrarily defined and the wheel spins on regardless of what letter & units you assign to the angle or how long you mesure the angle for. The trick of science, is to then take observable quantities and predict behaviour. For example, with the wheel, you could work out the power of the engine required to spin it at this specific angular velocity. And also you are aware that there is a counrty called greece where they do still use the 'Semitic trading runes and Mediterranean triangles'. The reason scientists still use them is convention. If there was a good reason to change it, scientists would.

If you were a little bit less lazy you could have found this out on your own, but seeing as the hallmark of humanities is 'this text makes me fell' or 'I think this source may be biased against King Something the 4th' there really is not much consistancy to speak of there. Anyway, enjoy your subject and the job at the double arches thereafter :)

this is fundamentally wrong, all concepts that describe reality are approximations but science has produced concepts with far greater accuracy than any other methodology. just because numbers may be "made up" (personally i think logicism will be proven right if anything is to be, it just makes the most sense to me but i'm not a mathematician so my opinion doesn't really matter here) doesn't mean that the relations cannot accurately describe reality, otherwise computers wouldn't work, senpai.

>Not so fast stemmie, it seems you forgot to understand the basic difference between objective and subjective reality!

That's the mistake you're making?

>No historian claims that a history book can cause a fire to light or a planet to move.

No scientist claims the parallel to this, either. We have a model by which we can understand reality in a manner that we can accurately predict future occurances. The only verifiable thing that theology can predict is that you die.

>That's why "science" is more similar to theology and religion than history, because it claims things that can never be proved.
[citation needed]

>because it claims things that can never be proved
He means in the strict metaphysical sense, which is correct but irrelevant because it applies to literally everything except your own existence

>You cannot be a student of higher education and be on Veeky Forums.
These are the leaps and bounds by which stemmies not only justify the mirage that is the "success" they will supposedly receive, but also their entire field.

>All we ever have is observation and interpretation
If have never seen Zeus, but I observe the effects of his supposed actions, the opinions of his subjects and worshipers, and interpret what I feel about Zeus from these things, that does not prove Zeus's existence. However, if I see a fire in front of me, I can be sure of its existence.

>we make abstractions in an attempt to describe how the universe works
And that's the fatal flaw in your reasoning. You create abstractions from your subjective mind in order to try and make sense of objective reality, which makes as much sense as telekinesis.

The spots in the picture are just that, spots. I could easily recreate this image by taking a closeup picture of my carpet. An atom is supposedly more than just one tiny dot. A hydrogen atom has one proton with one electron orbiting it. How do these dots bear any resemblance to the atom that we have been taught?

>It's not so much 'governed' as 'explained by'
No. It is governed by it. Your conflation of the word "eat" and the use of algebra is completely nonsensical. Just because I say or spell the word "eat" in front of a piece of food doesn't alter the objective reality of that piece of food one bit. However, according to the stemmie, just adding or removing or altering one Semitic mark, Balkan rune, or Italian line can fundamentally alter the course by which a process or an object operates within our objective reality. Something as basic as movement is condensed to a series of scratched lines that, when altered, change objective reality. That makes as much sense as sacrificing to an imaginary god for a change in your objective circumstances.
cont

why do you even respond to this retarded thread?
its not even a good bait...

sage

OP is yet another baiting-addict hiding behind smug amphibian expressions.

Why are philosophers so verbose when trying to describe things that are so simple? Are they that insecure with their ideas that they need to use flowery words in order to appear intelligent? To those who can understand English fluently you just come off as idiots.

>If have never seen Zeus, but I observe the effects of his supposed actions, the opinions of his subjects and worshipers, and interpret what I feel about Zeus from these things, that does not prove Zeus's existence. However, if I see a fire in front of me, I can be sure of its existence.
If your conception of Zeus is the best model you have for the phenomena observed and allows you to predict future phenomena, then you should use that model as your working hypothesis until someone comes up with a better one

>You create abstractions from your subjective mind in order to try and make sense of objective reality
This is exactly what science is about. You observe reality then invent a model to describe and predict its future behaviour

You seem to have this weird idea that science is about discovering "the truth". It is not

>How do these dots bear any resemblance to the atom that we have been taught?
You are taught a very simplified model to make it easier to understand the basics. How do you think the image of the atom is fundamentally different from any digital photograph?

Because they never learned optimization, that's why their lives revolve around low income careers.

>The trick of science, is to then take observable quantities and predict behaviour.
Just like the trick of the Roman soothsayers, augurs and priests was to interpret natural events and tell whether it meant good omens, bad omens, and what god caused it? But you probably didn't know that such a thing even happened, seeing as you have taken it upon yourself to ignore the study of how your species got to the point it did.

>If there was a good reason to change it, scientists would.
Except there isn't any and never, EVER will be, You know why? Because the actual shapes and concepts that these symbols are based on will NEVER be proved wrong. Why? Because they can't. Why? Because they have NO CONNECTION TO REALITY and therefore cannot be altered by it. What "scientific" event could ever dissuade an aspergers ridden stemmie like you to reconsider what lines you create to represents your abstract concepts? The answer is nothing.

>No scientist claims the parallel to this, either. Yes it does, within science, if I burn (a "combustion reaction." in the language of the stemmie) a material supposedly composed of the letters Mn, H, Cl, Ba, and Ag, then the result would be fundamentally altered if I added or removed Ag to the equation. Whereas, whether a text from the Song dynasty includes mentions of their trading contacts or not does not disprove the fact that they had trading contacts. That's because History does not pretend to affect objective reality in any current way whatsoever and is primarily concerned with discerning past reality via deciphering subjective accounts. The glorious thing about history is that a narrative can be wrong. Whereas stemmies insist upon the fact that their every formula and equation affects all human beings in an intimate and omnipresent way, much like a priest insists upon the presence of god in a population's life regardless of whether the population is aware of god.

>yet there is not one picture or image of any atom anywhere.

BTFO
T
F
O

>Roman soothsayers, augurs and priests
Could not accurately predict future events

This is how we judge our theories, how closely they match the data and the accuracy of their predictions

>arts fag tries to call out physicists and mathematicians

kek, my paycheck compared to yours is the real joke though.

You're pretty ignorant if you think science has never proven itself to be false. In fact falsifying hypotheses is one of the main goals of the scientific method. It's no wonder you think science is the same as religion if you think it's based on a faith based system.

>STEM is only math and physics
Math and physics goes to

>science is just like theology or astrology

>lib arts fags can't into abstraction
what a shock

Sophists, the lowest form of philosopher.

>Yes it does, within science, if I burn (a "combustion reaction." in the language of the stemmie) a material supposedly composed of the letters Mn, H, Cl, Ba, and Ag, then the result would be fundamentally altered if I added or removed Ag to the equation.

>>have two fires
>>throw more shit in one fire
>>fire burns that shit
>>fundamentally different from the other fire

At least troll in a manner that actually engages me intellectually, not that pathetic shite you're positing.

You are arguing with someone who is doing the equivalent of arguing that the sea is in fact dry.

He's never going to stop posting until his mommy calls him for dinner.

For any Veeky Forums people who aren't versed on philosophy, Stirner wold never have said something so retarded and his theory was not based on "you cannot nuffin" like people mis-represent it to be.

We know we DON'T know these things because of stem, which is its major purpose

Math is the closest thing we have to have a language for nature itself. If you really think about it, nearly everything is related to everything else out of convenience.

>false premise is not true!
lol

Just sage the troll to death anons

>How do you know I'm not in Law school preparing to represent my client when I sue you for all the rights to all of the work you've done? How do you know I'm not going to be a stockbroker who fucks all of your investments and ruins you while you're on the verge of retirement? How do you know I'm not going to become a politician that can hamper or even put a full stop to your work and livelihood as I please?
Because we have job security.

>he thinks science is the domain of absolute truth

fucking lel. """"""truth"""""" is irrelevant, science is about being useful and/or making money. our models could be 100% wrong and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference.

>The glorious thing about history is that a narrative can be wrong
And in science a model can be wrong and they often are. I wouldn't call it glorious, though.

Veeky Forums can we make positivism punishable by death?
I'm serious, it is more of a plague on science than any strand of relativism ever has been.

Its fine if you replace "truth" with "most plausible theory"

not at all. there are plenty of incorrect models in science that still see use. hard sphere model of the atom for instance.

They are used for practical purposes they are no longer considered the most plausible theory

I don't think you understood my post.
I want *you* to get hanged with all the other positivists.

You sound like an idiot then, since what I described is pretty much the basic principle science operates on

It's difficult to read people argue against such an obvious troll. OP is equated scientific concepts with the symbols representing them. It's a fruit of a poison tree argument, or logically speaking, a bottom. Don't even bother, you cant' win against fools.

>hurr durr positivism is the only valid epistemology
I see the engineering faculty brainwashing works wonders

its the only one that pays the bills.

>Veeky Forums - Money Fetishists

>how do stemmies feel about the fact that their beliefs are as provable as any religion?

I don't believe anything that isn't provable.

I don't believe in axioms, but I know that certain theorems follow from axioms.

don't forget the perks like going to boondoggle conferences and pushing around the proletariat.

>I don't believe anything that isn't provable
So you dont believe in anything except your own existence?

All knowledge is as provable as religions if you don't start with any assumptions. Our assumptions are just much more fundamental to human intuition than most of the humanities.

If this is incorrect then name something that is provable. The thing is to prove something, you must accept that logic is true.

>idort doesn't understand the difference between descriptive and prescriptive laws
>embarrasses himself on a Laotian used car browsing forum

Delicious

...

Nigger.

>fully abstract,non-physical, man-made concepts
... as opposed to fully concrete, physical, extraterrestrial-made concepts?
GTFO fgt pls

>Unless you have an actual image of an atom doing what atoms are said to do
nigger

feel pretty good about it desu

we are just a fish who couldn't make it as a fish

everything is meaningless

kek

Atoms exist as far as our perspective does, they're the result of interference by measurement, still technically waves of data

...

My job consists of litterally looking at atoms and observing the crystal structure of various materials for a living. Pls.

> inb4 paid off by the illuminati.

>Almost every single 'rule' and 'method' in your shit field involves fully abstract,non-physical, man-made concepts that were created only a few thousand years ago.
>being a philosophy major and not knowing what platonism is
EleGiggle

>How do you know I'm not going to be a stockbroker who fucks all of your investments and ruins you while you're on the verge of retirement?
Most of the STEM people I know manage their own investment accounts through discount brokerage firms like TD Ameritrade, E*Trade, etc. Sorry to ruin the fantasy.

But science works, so too bad for (You)
:^)

is this a hot new copy pasta i dont know about?

Okay but scientific models don't purport to be the truth.