"So anyways, long before we were practising science, we were doing perfectly well - in a sense without any real knowledge of the objective world at all. Or at least not any scientific knowledge of the objective world. And so another thing that you might observe about that is that you can survive perfectly well without knowing any science at all in an articulated and developed manner, and of course animals are in that category. So that also I think in some sense undermines the claim of science to anything approaching a universal truth because obviously life can get along perfectly well without it."
Is he saying physics isn't true because of the bible? Really?
Charles Cruz
yeah dipshit, thats exactly what hes saying
consider suicide
Jace Hernandez
He is a science denalist Christian Conservative Cuck isn't he?
Alexander Campbell
Is this the shitposting thread?
You auscucks are supposed to let us syrupniggers know about these, eh?
Angel Perez
This is true. We don't need science to explain the world around us because we are alive whether we know every little thing or not. Most scientific knowledge is useless outside of a book or a classroom. It's mostly just to give faggots a sense of purpose so they can make money and have titles and accreditation.
Jace Lopez
His argument is that because we don't need thorough study of natural sciences to "get along" it doesn't tell us empirical truths?
Clearly wrong, but I understand if he's blinded by some sort of Christian idealism. I still respect this man's rationality.
Adam Rodriguez
Ausfags need to kill yourselves.
He's merely saying that the social construct as enough to keep humans alive without having to know about the objective world.
You don't need a phd in science to eat and fuck and fight.
Peterson isn't anti science.
Leo Wilson
No, that's not what he is saying.
Ethan Ortiz
He said science may not approach a universal truth... That's kinda one of the main points of science. If you think it doesn't you're basically anti science.
Aiden Robinson
He is saying that science doesnt teach us "how to live" because through basic observation of the world, every other thing that isnt human is "living" perfectly fine without it.
Tyler Martinez
The cornerstore of the scientific method is thinking you know nothing
Cameron Roberts
Spoke to my friends about Peterson and they were very intrigued. What's the best bang for your buck introductory video?
Aiden Gonzalez
You're fucking terrible at reading comprehension.
He's saying that people have been able to understand how to live and survive well and have a good life before our obsession with the objective world provided us with the incredible benefits we now have.
He's saying that philosophy doesn't need physics. He's not saying anything about physics being bad.
Remember to sage
Mason Evans
It could teach us how to live better though.
Austin Clark
>S
Nicholas Roberts
I believe his idea is that you don't have to know the reason for something to make use of it. Holding a spear from its center of gravity gives you the most consistent and accurate throw.
Knowing the physics of WHY that is the case does not help you. You might just as well believe, wrongly, that other parts of the spear are cursed or poisoned or something, and your result of accurate throws would be the same.
A scientific understanding can help us connect ideas, but it's not strictly necessary.
Ayden Barnes
>because obviously life can get along perfectly well without it Yeah good luck when gravity suddenly stops working because you don't need scientific reality, and you float off into the fucking sky, along with that dumb black chick in South Africa who wants newtonian physics abolished because it's obviously racist.
William Sanchez
>Remember to sage I'll sage you ya cunt.
Parker Morris
Good!
Xavier Carter
Maybe in a materialistic sense. But living as a better person (or people) cannot be done through science.
Nothing in science can tell us if abortion, the death penalty, etc is good or not. Morale question can never be answered by science because morality is subjective and science doesnt deal with anything subjective.
This is why we laugh at all the psychologist that think they are a "science" because nothing about the psyche is objective.
Cameron Jackson
has it?
Charles Martinez
This is why niggers like you are doomed. Science isn't about the answers, its about the questions. There is alot of shit we will never be able to know, and alot of stuff we wont know for a long ass time. Thinking its some divine truth is just turning it into a religion like the fucking idiots on the left have done.
Worshiping science as a divine answer will lead to nothing but destruction. Think about time for instance, its something we use to base all of our understanding and reality off of. Yet its a perception, time is not real, its something humans have learned to measure. So our science would be complete trash to beings that don't measure time in the same way we do. We are limited by our perceptions, there is no way we could know everything.
Jackson Baker
>This is why we laugh at all the psychologist that think they are a "science" because nothing about the psyche is objective. This is true, but even the most idiotic psychologist is no where near as insane as the average sociologist/anthropologist. Psychologist are at least trained to pretend they are dealing with the scientific method, the other social "scientists are not, yet they have convinced them selves that they deal objective knowledge.
Kevin Russell
Oh sweet. A Frauderson thread!
HE'S A CTR PLANT
HE'S A MARXIST
HE'S A SPOILED DADDIES BOY
HE'S A CRACK HEAD
HE'S CONNECTED TO GEORGE FUCKING SOROS
>pic related. Soros shills, shilling. Including a set up thread I made to prove it
James Smith
Certain parts of morality can be derived from science if you discover what living well for a human is through it. i.e. there are certain things that are good for humans by virtue of us being human Therefore rules can be made on how we should act based on these objective facts. That probably comes down more to a matter of semantics on how you want to define morality, though.
Plenty about human psychology is objective + empirical. The issue is people's brains who work functionally differently to others, which can make finding general rules for curing say a mental illness difficult. in that sense the exception is proving the rule
Matthew Kelly
...
Jacob Butler
...
Evan Barnes
...
Aiden Butler
Actually sociologist are closer to science than psychologiost because the things they care about are observable (people and group interactions, group dynamics, etc). What makes sociology not a science is that nothing about it is reproducible to a great degree, which is one of the stalwart tenets of proving theories. But yes, they too are not a science, to which degree is pretty much relevant on the whole.
James Barnes
>Actually sociologist are closer to science than psychologiost dropped
>Certain parts of morality can be derived from science if you discover what living well for a human is through it. i.e. there are certain things that are good for humans by virtue of us being human examples please
and i bet any examples you do give has roots in morale activities of humans from 1000s of years ago (aka before science)
Zachary Powell
...
Owen Gray
...
Connor Brooks
...
David Reed
>didnt even read the whole post to which degree something is not a science doesnt matter in the greater sense when we are interested in things that are science and things that arent science
also filtered
Henry Lewis
Man this guy was easy to rekt The shills did it for him though LOOOOL
Austin Martin
ITT: fucking morons with no reading comprehension
Jeremiah Butler
...
Nathan King
Clean your room, boys.
Jaxon Barnes
i.e. humans by nature want to be alive so murdering a human without reason is wrong -for- humans
oughts from is objection is solved if you place "for humans" at the end of a moral judgement.
Charles Kelly
Stay cucked, baby boi.
Caleb Gray
What is with this insane leaf and his all consuming hatred of peterson, he spams and makes threadss like this all the time I really think that its someone who teaches with him or goes to the same school. How jealous can one person be Im beginning
Ayden Gonzalez
Wish I had looked into this fraud when his grey cracksmoker face showed up on pol. Too bad he gained a little traction here.
Benjamin Wright
In this thread, a real counterpoint to any of peterson's philosophy hasn't really been offered. So yeah.
Xavier Martin
Scientific Materialism is inadequate to explaining the totality of 'truth', because you do not even perceive the world in purely materialist terms, much less begin to explain the nature of reality based on material things you can perceive. There is a level of reality beyond that dimension. This has been the problem of problems in philosophy, and it is starting to become a realistic problem precisely because, with traditional religion falling out of favor, we have shaped our society around scientific materialism.
We need to seek a solution because so far we see people trying to fill that void left by religion with shit like leftist utopian ideology and the like. There is wisdom in the traditions that has brought our society up from the ashes and into structure and civilization. We need to reconnect with that, and understand that some truths are beyond scientific scrutiny.
Xavier King
>i.e. humans by nature want to be alive so murdering a human without reason is wrong -for- humans Guys we got a real fucking Einstein over here.
Jace Ross
>tfw failed Peterson's class and dedicate your free time to butthurt shitposting Dis nigga stuck in the underworld
Justin Reyes
Make your own nonsense talk Frauderson quotes.
Ryder Bell
Holy fuck, leaf range ban when?
Jordan Sullivan
What's wrong with you?
Eli Perry
THE SUPPOSER!!!!!!!!
Nolan Clark
He's leaned hard on this, apparently Nietzschean, definition of truth as being 'that which is useful'. Which sort of /includes/ the usual 'how to make electricity' stuff. But he pushes it too hard and looks like a kook imo. He does it I think because he wants his abstract version of mythology and Christianity to be more accepted as 'Truth' in this sense, because they could very well (admittedly) be more useful to ultimate human survival than 'how to make an atomic bomb' or finding a cure for cancer.
Nathaniel Hill
...
Hudson Gomez
Only underage mentally ill transgenders use the word fuccboi
Grayson Lewis
you seem a little tired
Julian Phillips
I keep hearing his Joe Rogan interview touted. There was another, shorter list but I lost track of it :(
Matthew Rodriguez
Guess who was a STUDENT of his?? Anita Saarkesian!!! (just a supposition. They're both canadian and from Toronto though)
Ryan Watson
The biggest problem with scientific materialism is that we simply aren't wired for it. We use the same brain circuits for considering both what is, and what should be. We get so caught up in thinking about one we almost completely lose track of the other. While it doesn't happen to everyone, it gets damn close, right up to some of the smartest people in the world. And nobody even realizes it's happening.
Materialism makes us go crazy.
Nicholas Cooper
What do you object to. i'm explaining why saying you can't get ought from is may be flawed under a certain intepretation of morality
Charles Sanders
"No"
Ryan Peterson
He use to be a Gas Pump Jockey before PhD WOOOOOOWW Does he give lectures on Premium Vs Unleaded??
Evan Ramirez
You are mentally ill.
Get off the internet, get some help, and get medicated.
To the rest of Sup Forums, I apologize for this escaped mental patient.
Jordan Long
>That's kinda one of the main points of science. Wrong
Robert Brooks
He use to wash dishes at a restaurant before his PhD WWWWOOOOOWWWWWW
>Sorting the dishes out, makes work go faster >Did you s-s-s-s-sort the dishes out so I can run them through the dish washer??
Carson Thomas
Wow what a shit fucking thread Peterson was BASED in that comment. It reflects the understandings of eastern philosophy, science-worshipping cucks BTFO
Jordan Smith
He was such a HARD WORKER they promoted him to French Fry Cook!! WWWOOOWWWWW!!!!!
Jose Collins
"For humans" doesn't solve it because there's no guarantee that you as a human even want to keep existing. This is also a very deep problem in the philosophy of morality itself.
We have to live on some faith at certain points. We have to let go of our insistence on being sure about every single thing.
Anthony Roberts
...
Lucas Cooper
He was also a Garbage Man for a summer (just a supposition. Not on his official website like the other jobs he listed)
Henry Baker
I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is that science assumes that there is a reality, and therefore an actual objective truth to be found. if it didn't there'd be no point in it
Jose Young
a 2:21 in that video, are those touhou figures something you can get somewhere? Thanks.
Easton Collins
LOL
Jose Rodriguez
...
Andrew Jones
idiot
Sebastian Moore
FUCK OFF SHILL, wtf is this your first time here? we are watching you answer yourself FAGGOT
Blake Evans
...
Jaxson Mitchell
>assumes that there is a reality I don't think it even does that. It assumes that through certain inputs to a system, we can, with a chance of deviation, usually get certain outputs, and that there are rules of varying complexity that determine that.
That's called instrumentalism. There was a school of thought opposite that, that DID claim the existence of an underlying reality, but for the life of me I can't remember what it was called.
Which is weird because it was first pure philosophical argument I ever read that really gripped me as more than a bunch of self proclaimed intellectuals jacking each other off.
Luke Perez
...
Christopher Jenkins
you are so dumb. i bet you failed his class
Brandon Torres
There are lot of people who might want to try and damage his reputation. My imagination jumps between considering SJWs who want to try and turn Sup Forums against him (good luck with that) to monied interests who realize that, despite his mild manners, he might actually be a huge threat to the status quo, to just plain bitter trolls who couldn't understand Jung's archetypes.
Zachary Adams
Holy fuck, this cracksmoking knob "professor" and his shills have me DAYS of belly laughs.
I guess I should thank him.................. NOPE
YOU SUCK FRAUD!!
LOOOOOOOOOOL
Gavin Kelly
So if its someone's nature that they dont want to exist anymore they can go around killing anyone and everyone they wanted since we are now saying "nature" is something that is objective and thus can derive ridiculous conclusions from it?
Charles Rogers
But time is real user, it is influenced by gravity. Time moves slower near high grav objects, people even have to compensate for the difference in satellites orbitting the earth, google it fag
Easton Adams
>It assumes that through certain inputs to a system, we can, with a chance of deviation But surely another core principle is that if you put the exact same inputs into the exact same system you should always get the exact same output. science is figuring out what inputs produce what outputs, and if an input produces a different output then what about the system has changed i guess by reality i mean something like "a common environment in which we can practice the same experiments"
Austin Rodriguez
he's awesome and there for the people. you can tell he genuinely cares.
Mason Ortiz
I'm talking about humanity as a whole. trying to form morality on an individual basis is what im saying the mistake Hume makes is
Levi Scott
your reddit is sore and showing
Jayden Reyes
...
Ayden Scott
Why does /lit/ hate him so much?
Landon Jenkins
they do? and who the fuck goes on /lit/?
Ryder Butler
Dude, no matter how much you post here he'll still be successful and you won't. All you'll do is dig yourself into a hole emotionally, and annoy the rest of us. Why don't you write about why you feel the way you do about Peterson, go over how he apparently harmed you and what you can do about it. If he was in the right, suck it up; if it was a mixed bad, muse on it until you're at equilibrium. But seriously, you're just digging your emotional hole deeper by committing so much emotional energy that achieves nothing. You're going to come out weaker at the end of it.
Joshua Lopez
>you should always get the exact same output Quantum physiscs is as direct a counter-argument you can get to that specific claim, but you can still infer the existence of an underlying reality even if it's just based on probability.
You probably have a lot in common with Popper, where I am more in line with Dewey.
Nathaniel Gomez
/lit/ is the most elitist board on Sup Forums
Andrew Richardson
Which is kind of funny because most of the people I've read from there are anything but "elite"
Noah Kelly
>I'm talking about humanity as a whole. But how do you know that? Maybe they want to live because the fear the pain that is involved with dying not because they want to live?
