• @afraid_of_zombies
    link
    38 months ago

    The assumption of science is that our senses are real.

    You keep asserting this and I am not seeing you provide evidence for this. How did you look into the minds of anyone doing an experiment in history to see this?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      08 months ago

      You literally cannot make an observation without the senses. You can’t DO an experiment without using your senses.

      I’m really confused by the misunderstanding. I do assume the senses are real. I teach science. I’m not trying to disprove it.

      Any steps or methodology includes facts and observations. Which you acquire through senses.

      • @afraid_of_zombies
        link
        18 months ago

        Right but that doesn’t mean that you have a prior assumption. Your students aren’t starting from philosophical first principles they are learning the methods of science long long before they will ever learn the philosophy that is used to justify it. And as a scientist/teacher you know historically this is exactly what happened. We observed and then we derived, not the other way around.

        The problem with all the presup arguments is they can’t accept that with very very few exceptions actions proceed thoughts. They depend an underlying basis for the universe and epistemology then not finding one they declare god and fuck off. And it goes all the way back to Plato.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          18 months ago

          I feel like you’re going beyond anything I’ve said.

          I had to look up this presup you keep saying. I think you’re just defending science or something because you feel threatened by what I’m saying. Maybe you hated me using the word “assumption”. I’m not a skeptic. I’m not trying to convince anyone that religions have the same weight as science or anything. I’m an atheist. Science is my living.

          Science begins with an assumption that the senses are real. That’s it.

          Caveman and fire analogy? Yes, started with an observation using senses. Then the questions came. And seeking understanding of the observations. That’s all well and good; great even. Science is the study of our natural world and that is only perceived through our senses. Even when our senses seem to be wrong, like water bending light. It was through further observation that we get new, better information. Cool that senses are used for other things as well. Even before science, and even by other living things.

          As long as there exists some possibility that we’re all in a computer simulation, our senses are an assumed reality. I’ll repeat though, that doesn’t make anything more or less likely, it just is what it is.