malf
Member
What does prop up mean? Where in the scientific method does 'should not prop up' occur? Construct formulation? Observation? Inductive research? Intelligence development? Necessity formulation? Hypothesis construction?
Every single idea in the history of man was at one time, propped up. This is a false standard, taught by a modern religious order, not something taught by our key philosophers of science.
This is romanticizing - when the history of the accrual of knowledge is used to justify the oppression of thought. This is a learned martial art of immunity from scientific method (pseudoscience). It is like saying it's OK for your family to rob banks since all its ancestors were preachers and ran orphanages.
For instance, I am a solid Climate Change proponent. I have invested a ton into green energy and crude oil businesses seeking remedy of our accelerating carbon and methane ppm's. I support science in this consensus. But that does not mean that I go out and try and marginalize those who are doing Earth core exothermal cycle research. I want to see their research - even if it threatens or changes our ideas about climate change. Just because I heed the consensus on climate change does not mean that I must attack anyone who proposes a supplemental or alternative idea, by deeming it 'propped up'.
So can you imagine how extensively more invalid such activity is, when consensus does not exist?
A materialist with integrity should never be threatened by the work of those who do not share the same bent. They should be excited by the work, not attack the work as worthless and the researchers as fringe bingo. History tells us that knowledge advances by Paradigm Shifts and the passing-on of those who were holding new ideas back (Kuhn-Planck Paradigm Shift). Again, what you have related here is false social propaganda from a specific religious group.
This is not how philosophers of science, pose how science works.
I would take you more seriously if you went through Michael’s last couple of posts and dissected them. There’s plenty to work with.
Have you any thoughts about wavelengths of light interacting with cone cells and folding that into a model that denies any external reality?
We then have the interesting fact that the human neonate is colour blind, with colour vision maturing over the first 5-6 months as the eye is exposed to these wavelengths of light. No exposure in the early years = no colour vision in the adult. The implications for the development of perception, awareness and dare I say it, ‘consciousness’ are there for those that want to see.