4 ms·
Another science/tech philosophical breakdown. Stars are. Only human perception can be "weird".
by ChefDenominator 10y ago
Another science/tech philosophical breakdown. Stars are. Only human perception can be "weird".
- oldmanjay 10y agoAnd what useful conclusions can be drawn from that?
- ChefDenominator 10y agoThat depends on what an individual would perceive as being useful.
- oldmanjay 10y agoThe most charitable interpretation I can then offer is that it is masturbation. Nothing wrong with masturbation, of course, but it's rather unseemly to do it in public.
- thingexplainer 10y agoThe correct answer would have been to pick a reasonable assumption (before you ask, your own judgement determines what is reasonable) for what "useful" is, and to clarify that that was the assumption you were using. We don't have to question whether or not anything means anything in order to engage with every topic every time, but I appreciate the exercise.
- ChefDenominator 10y agoThis is a strawman trying to confuse my claim with nihilism.
- treve 10y agoThat works for a lot of stuff: > Stars are. Only human perception can be "red, and giant". We describe things using metaphors and concepts that make sense in our world. So what's your point?
- thingexplainer 10y agoSaying "something is weird" certainly implies "this does not match my expectations."
- ChefDenominator 10y agoYou are pretty much spot-on with matching up to my statement. Implicit in your claim is that science has an expectation, which is a gross conceptual error. The down-votes suggest you are not the only one.