Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alamo-Girl; MHGinTN
Alamo-Girl: "That's a fascinating metaphor, dear BroJoeK, thank you for sharing it!"

You're welcome. ;-)
Did you also like the metaphor of the tool box (post #19) -- which gains no value, and makes us idiots, if we put it up on some alter, and bow down to worship it?

Alamo-Girl: "Problems arise when people "do" theology or philosophy under the color of science..."

In posting and discussing these matters on Free Republic, it does seem to me that much, if not most, of the confusion arises from people's mis-understandings of distinctions between science on the one hand and philosophy, theology, religion and even politics on the other.
Science itself should have little or nothing to say about those subjects...

Alamo-Girl: " '...it is unknowable by the scientific method'... "

Bingo! We have a winner. :-)

Alamo-Girl: "I would also put "randomness did it" in the same faith statement bucket since we cannot say something is random in the system when we don't know what the system "is." "

Thank you. It's one of my favorite subjects, because it answers the famous question raised by Albert Einstein when he was puzzling over (iirc) issues of quantum mechanics, and remarked: "G*d does not play dice with the Universe".

No! Albert-baby, buddy, you got it all wrong!
The physical Universe is one giant casino, with "slot machines" everywhere you turn, and every single one of them is rigged, just like Vegas, to produce a profit for "the House", and who, in the Universe is "the House", if not it's Creator, G*d?

In the long run, G*d's purposes will not be denied, yes "machines" "randomly" produce winners and losers, but G*d's Will will be done.

And in the shorter runs?
Wouldn't you suppose that those who understand the "games" stand a better chance of coming out ahead?

;-)

56 posted on 07/31/2013 7:04:18 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK; MHGinTN; betty boop; TXnMA
Thank you so much for your encouragements, dear BroJoeK, and for sharing your insights! And I do like the toolbox metaphor - somehow I missed it on my first reading of the thread.

Science itself should have little or nothing to say about those subjects...

Alas, some scientists cannot resist stepping into areas requiring a different discipline and making observations without delineating the difference. Since science derived from philosophy in the first place, some of that is understandable.

Beginning of Modern Science and Modern Philosophy

The word "science" itself is simply the Latin word for knowledge: scientia. Until the 1840's what we now call science was "natural philosophy," so that even Isaac Newton's great book on motion and gravity, published in 1687, was The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (Principia Mathematica Philosophiae Naturalis). Newton was, to himself and his contemporaries, a "philosopher." In a letter to the English chemist Joseph Priestley written in 1800, Thomas Jefferson lists the "sciences" that interest him as, "botany, chemistry, zoology, anatomy, surgery, medicine, natural philosophy [this probably means physics], agriculture, mathematics, astronomy, geography, politics, commerce, history, ethics, law, arts, fine arts." The list begins on familiar enough terms, but we hardly think of history, ethics, or the fine arts as "sciences" any more. Jefferson simply uses to the term to mean "disciplines of knowledge."

That, btw, is my peeve about the abuse of the word "random." Randomness originates as a Mathematics term. It has a specific meaning, to wit one cannot say something is random in the system when he doesn't know what the system "is."

Quantum mechanics relies on statistics and it works, but that does not mean ipso facto that the physical universe is random at the root since we do not know, indeed cannot know, the full number and types of dimensions.

Jeepers, we cannot deny the existence of particles or fields which do not have a direct or indirect measurable effect.

"Information" is yet another term misappropriated by the Sciences from the discipline of Mathematics. Information Theory is a branch of Mathematics originating from Claude Shannon's Mathematical Theory of Communications.

In Shannon's theory information is the reduction of uncertainty in the receiver (or molecular machine as applied to biology) in moving from a before state to an after state. The math is so much like thermodynamics, it is called "Shannon entropy."

In common parlance, the term which refers to the action is falsely used to describe the content of the message being sent or received. For instance, the letter in your mailbox is not information, information happens when the letter is read.

Worse, in science the term has been misappropriated to mean determinism, i.e. physical cause/effect.

In my view, mathematics is a more elegant and certain discipline for knowing than any of the science disciplines. And misappropriating its terms results in a false sense of elegance and certainty in the sciences.

Indeed, I very strongly agree with Wigner (the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences) and go further to observe theologically that mathematics is God's copyright notice on the cosmos.

58 posted on 07/31/2013 8:10:07 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson