Essentially he is saying, "If only the world were a better place...it would be a better place."
You are obviously a deep thinker. I appreciate your view point; it is interesting to say the least, albeit a bit too abstact for me.
I see nothing nebulous with the word existence. I do see your point regarding wave/particle duality. ( my belief is that SAPs travel as a wave and arrvive as a particle, both an existence in their own right.)
As for evidence being negotiable after being trancended from naive realism, I reject this. If you show me something emperically such as the 2 slit experiment with an interferometer and demonstrate an interference pattern or no pattern based on HUP I beleive it and refuse to negotiate the point until I am shown further evidence to the contrary.
I'm a black and white kind of guy. (being a former cop)
As for Heisenberg exposing his children to religion, I would chalk that up to the attitudes culture of the time. Atheism today is barely acknowledged, back then it was akin to being a witch in Salem.
Kuhn for example would point out that "empirical evidence" is what we call "agreed observations described according to a particular directive paradigm". This leads to a highly simplified one-liner that "reality is a social construction]
I find the tenacity of your guesses to be interesting.
Quote:Kuhn for example would point out that "empirical evidence" is what we call "agreed observations described according to a particular directive paradigm". This leads to a highly simplified one-liner that "reality is a social construction]
In the abstract maybe. I believe with my eyes only...the only ones that count in my book.
I appreciate your thoughtful replies; I have actually learned from them. (although admittedly some of it is above my head)
I believe that people come to religion in only 3 ways:
1.) They were indoctrinated with dogma during their formative years...not an easy thing to change even if they know intellectually thats its all a bunch of whooey.
2.) They have had a "religious experience"...which is merely a small electrical diturbance in the left pre-frontal cortex not unlike a mild form of epilepsy.
3.) They dont necessarily believe but are hedging their bet.
I have spoken to several scientists who tell me that it is easier to "get along" just by saying that they believe there might be something out there, etc.
After all, declaring you are an atheist is not unlike in the old days saying you were gay.
In his private papers, some of which were discovered in the last 10 years, it is evident that Einstein didnt believe and he felt those who did were childish and superstious and that god was a product and expression of human weakness. However he very well could not say so publicly.
I suspect that if it were more socially acceptable to be an atheist you would see more scientists (and others) admitting to this stance.
Quote:I find the tenacity of your guesses to be interesting.
I am pleased I am able to peak your interest.
That is why I argue for its origins as a psychological palliative (against a "meaningless existence") but also its regulatory social function as a rationalization of tribalism and chauvinistic power structures (as per other primates).
As much as I know there is no god, I equally know there is no satan...or hell.
So, as the song goes...dont worry, be happy.
I find it interesting, John, that you call acknowledging "atheism"...as "admitting."
Quote:I find it interesting, John, that you call acknowledging "atheism"...as "admitting."
Some people know that they are atheists but because of social pressure fear acknowledging it. Once they do...they are admitting it.
verb: admit; 3rd person present: admits; past tense: admitted; past participle: admitted; gerund or present participle: admitting
1. confess to be true or to be the case, typically with reluctance.
"the office finally admitted that several prisoners had been injured"
Frank...is it really all that necessary to parse words?