Top Ten List

Sorry, tha would be the romans.

Still smarter.

You meant Thales. Thats not a scientist.

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?

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Anyway, I’m using dialectics now. that must somehow mean I’ve been defeated.

I like the points you make and how you make them, so I’m sort of beyond caring now whether I’m right that you were wrong. So sue me.

Ok, let me gather myself here.

The question here, as postulated by Faust, I believe, is is science about epistemology? Knowing something directly about the world? If not, it must be about consensus.

And it cannot be, because there is no link between what things are and how words came to be.

And obviously im more than totally happy that you disagree with me here. If anything ever spoke for itself…
Just expressing my utter disdain for postmodernism and any type of consensus based “decisions”.

It would be less offensive to suggest that Caesar made his strategic decisions based on consensus. And that is already beyond offensive.

Ah, yeah, I certainly disagee with that. Science is only about how things work. You know science, you can build a weapon. Or a medicine. Its only about directly about the world. Postmodernism is the other thing.

Out for some tea.

Glad to be disagreeing with you on something.

There aint no bridge here.

I can only admit defeat, as I see my shtick getting sloppy.

You can defeat a man, but you cannot defeat reasonable acquiescence of a properly formulated philosophical postulation!

I will say, you called me an elitist, and by exention a collectivist.

Consuensus only matters when there is no collective, when understanding between individuals is concerned.

What you call consensus is not consensus, it is obedience, accepting some shit because some dude said it and not because you ever even pondered whether it makes sense.

There were no consensi between Church authorities. Just factions with more or less power to impose their made up shit.

Science is about a lot of things. We seem to have a lot of direct information about the world - at least a lot for humans. Seems like a lot to me. We use science to “see” things that are not so suitable to direct observation, even if science requires direct observation. Science is “about” predictions. We probably know pathetically little about how the world works. But that’s not a complaint or a reason not to learn.

Epistemology is about things we cannot discern directly, or with science, or any other fucking way except with our “minds”. Yeah, right. Belief is justified by the results. Done and done.

I will admit victory.

Ill stress one thing Weary Locomotive told me once long ago.
the only knowledge that matters is method. His emphasis.

The thing most 20th centuriers get wrong;
Science isnt about theory, but about practice.

String theory isnt science. Even the hypothesis for its experimentation would require a universe ten times the mass of whats estimated to be that of ours. The power of transmutation of the elements is science. Thats a method.

If a theory doesnt provide a method to new objectively verifiable powers (such as nuclear weapons), it isnt science.

If consensus has anything to do with science it is that people will be forced to agree with its existence if it is employed to coerce or seduce them. But certainly their (mis)understanding of or (dis)agreement with the Vision of which each scientific conception consists, is immaterial.