If we're talking about mathematical proof, I can't say I'm concerned about those particular proofs very often. When it comes to science, for the most part I accept the word of general concensus of scientists, since I am not a scientist. Even if I were, I'm sure I wouldn't have the ability to learn each field in depth to challenge those who make the subject in question their life's work.
When it comes to human behaviour.. I use myself as a barometer. I pay attention to my behaviours and their motivations. Especially the ones that people generally don't admit to in public. When someone does something that I don't understand, I try to imagine a situation that I might behave in the same way. In that way I attempt to evaluate the claims of knowledge of reasons for people's actions. Then for day to day things, I attempt to use reason, trying to cut through prejudices and adjust for points of view, myself and others. Then I weight the proof in my head from "probably not true, given the source, but possible", to "I'm certain this is right, and if its not, then I seriously need to reevaluate myself". Also a second scale is helpful ranging from "this is amazingly important to how I should be living day to day" to "true or false, it has very little effect on my life". Umm.. is that what you wanted to know? On Apr 28, 11:29 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > So lon, what do you use to determine whether a proof is valid? > > On Apr 28, 9:06 am, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ornamentalmind, > > > Yup, I'm BSing, and I hope I get points because I'm willing to admit > > it. I do believe my own BS though, until proved otherwise. ;) > > > On Apr 28, 10:47 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > "...Back when, there was not a thing such as Religion (believe in > > > things > > > that can't be proved). There was just stuff people knew in order to > > > survive, some of which were true, some were untrue, but not worth > > > testing, just in case. Gods were just an obvious explanation, it was > > > Occam's razor for the time." - Lon > > > > Of course, this too is but opinion/belief. No papers 'proving' it > > > anywhere I can find at least. > > > > Occam, when turned upon itself melts. > > > > On Apr 28, 8:34 am, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > That's really an odd question. To postulate you'd be able to seperate > > > > say, the Greek Pantheon from Greek Civilization. When did religion > > > > really become into being? > > > > > Today's common definition of Religion automatically makes the concept > > > > stupid. It basically breaks down into: the belief of things that > > > > can't be proved or are untrue. It must be about unprovable things, > > > > elsewise, why would you have to believe, instead of know? I think the > > > > problem today is that we have ways of proving and disproving things, > > > > but they have little to say about how we should behave. And it's > > > > really hard to decide to behave one way or another based on any reason > > > > science gives us. > > > > > Back when, there was not a thing such as Religion (believe in things > > > > that can't be proved). There was just stuff people knew in order to > > > > survive, some of which were true, some were untrue, but not worth > > > > testing, just in case. Gods were just an obvious explanation, it was > > > > Occam's razor for the time. > > > > > When humans went beyond simple survival, Religion was born. Even the > > > > most scientific people deal with belief today, though they may not > > > > include a God. Take global warning... is it real and human caused? > > > > God knows there are scientists out there to prove just that, even if > > > > it is not so. Because, they believe certain things: that nature > > > > should progress with as little human impact as possible. You can't > > > > scientifically prove that something like that is true. You may say > > > > that it is better for human survival, but even that is not exactly > > > > provable, and still requires the belief that our survival is a Good > > > > thing. > > > > > I don't think you can disentangle belief from human kind, history or > > > > future.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
