Top Ten List

[Pedro I Rengel]

Epistemology has historically been used to justify a moral theory. Plato, quite obviously. Hume used it to justify atheism. Descartes, Kant, all the greats. It's a phantom.

So it's a sucker bet just in terms of justifying a particular moral theory, but you're not throwing it out in other contexts?

This was already answered with the thing about jazz.

[Pedro I Rengel]

"There wasnt any consensus when Copernicus formulated things"

There sure was a whole deal of consensus around everything Cop used to arrive at his conclusions, to even know what to measure for.

Like Galileo. He designed all sorts of experiments out of vanity, but he never actually performed any of them. He already knew they would work.

I don't believe Faust means just any old consensus. He refers rather, I believe, to the very possibility of consensuality. It comes with a sort of clause: "if you're being honest, then"

Unavoidable consensus, say.

Do things fall into eachother?

Yes. Yes they do fall into eachother.

Science.


These are consensi rather than facts, because really, to establish a fact, epistemology needs to work. Like what IS the thing really? Fruitless question 99.999999999% of the time. Only time I ever seen it not be was when Will to Power was postulated. And it is an answer to the only askeable question in terms of what is: what is ANYHTING?

And you can't infer anything from it really. And generally follows the list heere, except the language thing which on its own doesn't stand. Philosophy being about language. That's like saying green is about color. I mean yeah, ok...

[Pedro I Rengel]

But Faust's task is generally about peeling the dirt from philosophy, separating philosophy from headless chickenry, and in that sense it is correct. Philosophy is only about postulating, never about giving or to rip directly from the tree of truth, so to speak.

[Pedro I Rengel]

I say this, you check it against your own log, and then you decide. It's never I say this and then so this.

[Pedro I Rengel]

I say this and then so this has never occured, and as an event was only ever described in Jewish lore regarding what God did to people. But the wole lesson from Judaism is that when that happens, it is simply not communicable or even really possible except when allmighty God himself, to whom nothing is impossible etc., does it to you.

[Pedro I Rengel]

And even THEN God is never really described as doing that. It is sort of implied that if he wanted to and humans were 1000000 smarter he could, but even to Moses he gives laws and things, never THIS.

[Pedro I Rengel]

"I saw God today."

"Really?! What did he say?!"

"He said brush your teeth every morning..."

"Huh. I guess he meant that philosophy is only about language."

[Pedro I Rengel]

Back to science: the reason it is consensuality rather than fact is that it is an opinion and measurement of a POSTULATION, not a thing.

[barbarianhorde]

I disagree. I think all that is not actually science, but more like social sciences. How can we say things so that people will buy this book? Thats consensus.

Whats science is completely obliterating the consensus - what Faust calls philosophy. And indeed there was, in serious peoples (the Greeks) no difference. And since Nietzsche it is back to that seriousness.

[barbarianhorde]

I was checking for regular use of the word consensus and I think Im totally right in this.
You can claim that it really means something else but that doesnt have my consent. Hahah. Deal with that now.

consensus noun [ S or U ]
uk ​ /kənˈsensəs/ us ​
​

a generally accepted opinion among a group of people:
The consensus among City economists is that interest rates will be held at 1%.
​

agreement among a group of people:
consensus on/about sth Achieving an international consensus on these issues is proving difficult.
a general/broad/growing consensus There is a growing consensus about the best methods for reducing carbon emissions.
reach/build/agree a consensus Our top priority must be building a consensus with legislators.
The process of taking decisions by consensus can be fraught with difficulty.

See this is all about moronic idiots agreeing with each other. Not about Newton or Archimedes or anyone who mattered because they actually had the power to figure something out. Thats what science is. Figuring shit out. And invariably it takes endless years before anyone who hasnt figured it out concedes that it may, despite his dumb ass pride, be the actual case. Maybe these morons then think that thats the criterium for it to be science, no, just, ugh- naw man. Its the scientist and his science. That doesnt even involve any language until he has to get some less smart people to make use of the power he disclosed.

[Pedro I Rengel]

"something out of nothing type stuff"

This is the rope I'm gonna hang you with.

Who came up with something out o nothing? Including Archimedes?

Tell me so that I can tell you, well actually, it came from this.

The postulation, of course, because only the postulation CAN be measured and opined on.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Figured out out of WHAT?

Did Archimedes not have a whole lore about water behind him to make water opinions on?

Pretty good opinions, I will concede.

That's not what this is about.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Fuck, mixed up my Greek physicists.

which science the word comes from a meaning that iss sort of thinking kind of, like in con-science. Apprehension.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Or knowing, rather. Knowing is a closer approximation. But knowing from the outside in. Kindof. Greeks were smarter than us.

[barbarianhorde]

"Did Archimedes not have a whole lore about water behind him to make water opinions on?"

lore of water?
He just sat in a tub and noticed displacement.

Lore doesnt figure into science. If thats what you think sure I can see you think consensus is what its all about. Lore is surely some consensual stuff.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Sorry, tha would be the romans.

Still smarter.

[barbarianhorde]

Fuck, mixed up my Greek physicists.

which science the word comes from a meaning that iss sort of thinking kind of, like in con-science. Apprehension.

You meant Thales. Thats not a scientist.

[Pedro I Rengel]

I fucked up with Archimedes. Was thinking of someone else.

Anyway, what questions was Archimedes asking to work on displacement? Hhow did it even occur to him that it mattered to know that an equal amount of water is displaced as the thing submerged in terms of volume?

Where the fuck he get that idea?

[barbarianhorde]

Archimedes was a military inventor and strategist who also started the scientific method.

[barbarianhorde]

I fucked up with Archimedes. Was thinking of someone else.

Anyway, what questions was Archimedes asking to work on displacement? Hhow did it even occur to him that it mattered to know that an equal amount of water is displaced as the thing submerged in terms of volume?

Where the fuck he get that idea?

His genius. None of these terms or questions had ever been remotely asked.

[barbarianhorde]

When I say nothing I dont mean literal nothing, of course it came from his brain, which isnt nothing at all, rather the brains of others are fucking nothing.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Except things HAD been asked. And the method may have been a genious answer to a problem Greeks were already aware of, aside from the specific problem of displacement or even water.

[barbarianhorde]

You completely misunderstand the scientific protocol if you think it is about working on some running question.
Thats postmodernism. The exact thing that tries to negate the glory of science which is pure elitism.

No, there have only been maybe a dozen scientists in the whole history of mankind. Nietzsche is counted among them.

Look, the very genius of a scientific thought is the question. To ask a sensible question. That is science.

[barbarianhorde]

Fucking postmodernist scum tries to make it seem like the fucking masses ever have anything to do with anything.

As if a billion people scratching their goddamn heads with a stupefied expression amounts in the brilliance of science. No, it doesnt.

[Pedro I Rengel]

If it wasn't about consensus, why would I even ASK?