Thread: What are your favourite simple things that science just cannot explain?

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

There is more that than, it was a Two-Element Metaphysics that runs through Plato's work, and that Aristotle did not quite grasp. Aristotle had a foot in two worlds.

Had it been developed, had what Plato saw been developed, a great many things would be different today.

You are a great deal smarter than you pretend to be, but you regard the crowd too much, and thus you are not entirely honest.

I enjoy reading about Metaphysics, I just now am starting to read about Two-Element Metaphysics.

Originally Posted by LxANN

I enjoy reading about Metaphysics, I just now am starting to read about Two-Element Metaphysics.

No one really developed it. It has to be done. That is why I hate seemlingly wasting my time here.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

No one really developed it. It has to be done. That is why I hate seemlingly wasting my time here.

I believe you've made progress getting the knowledge out there, now I am interested in Metaphysics, Two-Element Metaphysics. I will share it with as many people who care to become knowledgeable.

Originally Posted by LxANN

"The term metaphysics originally referred to the writings of Aristotle that came after his writings on physics. Traditionally, metaphysics refers to the branch of philosophy that attempts to understand the fundamental nature of all reality, whether visible or invisible. It seeks a description so basic, so essentially simple, so all-inclusive that it applies to everything, whether divine or human or anything else. It attempts to tell what anything must be like in order to be at all."

"Plato's ethics is inseparable from his epistemology. Epistemology is, broadly speaking, the study of what knowledge is and how one comes to have knowledge. Among the many topics included in epistemology are logic, belief, perception, language, science, and knowledge."
That's, in fact what's so special about them.

The search for knowledge and epistemology is a human ability that has been practiced maybe as far back as before the human species and continues till this day, not the ability of a few historical ego's. Giving too much credit to the famous people of tradition blocks you from a self-reliance that makes you say I'll think about it from scratch on my own and I'll believe someone else when I've come up with the same conclusion or it makes perfect sense to me through all self doubt. What's special here is what they did, what people have always done and can do now, not them.

Originally Posted by Philosopher8659

That is why I hate seemlingly wasting my time here.

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

The search for knowledge and epistemology is a human ability that has been practiced maybe as far back as before the human species and continues till this day, not the ability of a few historical ego's. Giving too much credit to the famous people of tradition blocks you from a self-reliance that makes you say I'll think about it from scratch on my own and I'll believe someone else when I've come up with the same conclusion or it makes perfect sense to me through all self doubt. What's special here is what they did, what people have always done and can do now, not them.

They came up with the principles, which makes them special, to me at least. They explained them, how to comprehend them as well.
I'm sorry, that must be my opinion.

What principles? Sorry, I haven't read their works very much, but I don't doubt they may have been the first recorded to ask certain questions.

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

What principles?

I honestly don't want to get into it right now, sorry.
I'm already stressed enough with personal issues outside of this site.

Ok, don't worry about it, hope you feel better though.

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

Ok, don't worry about it, hope you feel better though.

Thank you

Oh Jesus.. those bloody greeks had one basic problem: they thought a lot, but they didn't do.. and that's why their empire got usurped.

Anyone spot the modern DV parameter?

Action ALWAYS pisses on "thought"..

Have you ever actioned before you thought?
A lot of people go to jail that way.

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

What principles? Sorry, I haven't read their works very much, but I don't doubt they may have been the first recorded to ask certain questions.

Plato and Aristotle stand out because they did focus on different concepts than their predecessors. Before Plato philosophers focused primarily on ontological questions (Ex: Heraclitus believed everything to be composed of fire) Plato addresses ontological issues but turns the focus of philosophic inquiry to epistemology and ethics. Aristotle focused on the natural world and basically founded formal logic, biology, and physics.

These philosophers are not irrelevant (although yes Aristotle believed the sun to revolve around the earth but an error in his logic doesn't throw all his work out the window) in my opinion. When I first became interested in philosophy I said fuck Plato and Aristotle too and jumped right into Nietzsche and the postmodernists but now I regret starting out that way and am starting from the beginning of western philosophy starting at Plato.

No one is forcing anyone to read anything but if you are going to argue why Plato and Aristotle are irrelevant then it would be a good idea to be acquainted with their philosophies so you can adequately argue against them.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Plato and Aristotle stand out because they did focus on different concepts than their predecessors. Before Plato philosophers focused primarily on ontological questions (Ex: Heraclitus believed everything to be composed of fire) Plato addresses ontological issues but turns the focus of philosophic inquiry to epistemology and ethics. Aristotle focused on the natural world and basically founded formal logic, biology, and physics.

These philosophers are not irrelevant (although yes Aristotle believed the sun to revolve around the earth but an error in his logic doesn't throw all his work out the window) in my opinion. When I first became interested in philosophy I said fuck Plato and Aristotle too and jumped right into Nietzsche and the postmodernists but now I regret starting out that way and am starting from the beginning of western philosophy starting at Plato.

No one is forcing anyone to read anything but if you are going to argue why Plato and Aristotle are irrelevant then it would be a good idea to be acquainted with their philosophies so you can adequately arguing against them.

I'm not trying to argue against them, I'm just saying compared to jumping right into thinking for yourself, they are irrelevant aside from being a part of history. I consider them totally irrelevant to me right now because we know much more now, they're only artifacts of curious minds in history. I totally respect them for that, and because of that I'd rather continue their ways in a new era, not worship petty personal details about them and their writings.

Who is worshiping petty personal details about them?

"but now I regret starting out that way and am starting from the beginning of western philosophy starting at Plato."

Why? I guess I'm saying that they are kind of petty details now in a new age where the spirit they possessed works on, I like to think of philosophy as a perpetually new activity that humans do, not an accumulation of writings from eras of outdated knowledge.

Because I feel that I don't have an adequate understanding of philosophy. At the time I figured that anything that anyone said 2000 years ago must be wrong.

Basically if the history of philosophy is a big book, in my blind eagerness, I started at the very end and was surprised when I discovered that I didn't know as much as I thought I did.

Have you ever looked around you and asked yourself "Why?" something is the way it is "What is beyond?" that or "Which way?" is best for this? You have an adequate understanding of philosophy.

Conscience and consciousness.

Originally Posted by Oneiro

Oh Jesus.. those bloody greeks had one basic problem: they thought a lot, but they didn't do.. and that's why their empire got usurped.

Anyone spot the modern DV parameter?

Action ALWAYS pisses on "thought"..

Hi there. You're basically living in a continuation of Ancient Greece that started with the Renaissance. Enjoy your stay.

Seriously dude, good luck taking on an atom bomb with your bare fists.

Originally Posted by ThePieMan

Conscience

Howso?

Not exactly what this thread's been meant for, but still marginally relevant to the topic, plus it's interesting:

7 Simple Questions You Won't Believe Science Just Answered | Cracked.com


FWIW,

Tim

I seriously do not believe such a simple thing exists that science cannot explain.

Take consciousness, for example. Consciousness is the flow of external stimuli through a processing filter, while constantly rotated in and out of working memory, where it is further processed by a brain.

However, science cannot explain things that are false or unexplainable inherently. I bet nobody can explain why 1+1 = 0; it simply doesn't equal zero!

I know, it's occurred to me a long, long time ago that I misworded the thread topic. I really mean things that science has not yet explained, and by "simple things" I really meant simple things that we take for granted, NOT all-encompassing, complex things like "life and consciousness"

Originally Posted by ludr

Take consciousness, for example. Consciousness is the flow of external stimuli through a processing filter, while constantly rotated in and out of working memory, where it is further processed by a brain.

This isn't an explanation of anything.