Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
sci.physics.relativity
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Einstein - Greatest Human to have ever existed.
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Big Dog  
View profile  
 More options Oct 5 2012, 2:35 pm
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
From: Big Dog <big.fing....@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:36:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Einstein - Greatest Human to have ever existed.
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 10/5/2012 11:09 AM, Vilas Tamhane wrote:

>> Illustrating my point exactly. Mental constructs, including these
>> "fundamental concepts" cannot be destroyed because they are simply
>> matters of *choice*. If you *choose* not to question them, or feel dizzy
>> and disoriented and icky when they are questioned, then you won't do it.

>> There is nothing sacred about a physical concept. There are those that
>> seem to work better (in the sense that they match observation better),
>> and those that don't. For some people, that difference is not enough to
>> warrant challenging the physical concept, and then they CHOOSE not to do
>> that. Physicists, on the other hand, see no sacredness to physical
>> concepts and place priority on the practical assessment of how well they
>> work.

>> Your priorities, Alen, are just different than physicists'.

> Your line of thinking or for that matter this line of thinking is best
> explained by Alfonso. According to him scientists have abandoned
> reason, as a matter of philosophy, to support their theories. So
> according to this line of thinking what you say is correct. However,
> there are some like me who believe that such a philosophy takes
> science into realm of occult in which reason is not applied. This is
> not only dangerous but it is a criminal line of thinking.

I of course disagree. It is a hallmark of you, Alfonso, and Alen that
you believe that questioning any "fundamental concept" is tantamount to
abandoning reason, and that anyone who proposes something OTHER THAN
those "fundamental concepts" has veered into unthinking insanity. It is
the mentality that "Anything that is other than classical physics is
irrational, because only classical physics can be rational."

You and I have much different ideas of what constitutes rationality. To
me, deductive reasoning starts with a presumed premise, and develops
those premises by logic into conclusions. Hallmarks of deductive
reasoning is internal consistency and the lack of internal
contradictions, and the absence of claims that cannot be deduced from
the premises.

You, on the other hand, say that rationality MUST ALWAYS involve an
appeal to common experience and the generalization of common experiences
to apply even outside those common experiences -- an extrapolation
called "common sense". The problem, you see, is that insisting on that
element removes all possibilities of complete surprises -- those things
that common sense would have told you are flat-out impossible. By
declaring that thinking is only rational if no out-and-out surprises can
be entertained, then this is officially the closing of the mind. Nature
is FULL of surprises, exhibiting features that our previous thinking
about nature would say is simply impossible. You reject any Nature that
would do that to you.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google