Alethiometry

I'm currently taking a course called The Philosophy of Science, which is required for my major. My instructor is currently attempting to prove that science and religion are the same thing via six arguments. The most troublesome one is entitled "Separation by Foundation". Here's his argument: "Religion is, but Science is not, based on faith; Science is based on proof and observation. Now that we know what faith is, we can evaluate Separation by Foundation, and we can see quite clearly that it is false. If accepting something on faith is including it in the foundations, then it is clear that everyone accepts a great deal on faith, scientists doing science included. They do, of course, accept the testimony of their fellow scientists on many matters - not every claim made in the journals gets checked before being accepted. Even in those cases where checks are made, where, for example, experiments are repeated, scientists do not allow themselves to be taken in by Classical Foundationalism, not even when they are doing perceptual psychology. We would rightly think a scientist crazy if he began to raise serious questions about the existence of his laboratory or co-workers. Science may move beyond common sense, but it has no alternative to starting with it. Scientists, like the rest of us rational believers, have no choice but to accept a great deal without proof or justification. So accepting things, even important things, without proof, marks no difference between science and religion. It may be that what is accepted in this way, on faith, is different in science and religion, but that's tantamount to admitting that Separation by Foundation is false (-since it says that it is how statements are accepted, not what they say, that matters), and the difference lies elsewhere. Perhaps it does." I've posted his complete argument here. I thought you all might be interested in what a university student learns in a philosophy of science class. I'd also love to hear some counterarguments to his statements.

I am not sure if you're eligible, but I got out of two years of both English and History by taking the AP exams and doing well on them. I'm so glad I didn't have to deal with lots of lower-level humanities courses because I'm a science major. I've notice a huge disparity in the content of the humanities courses I'm taking now and the science classes I take for my major. While chemistry classes teach me to deal with reality, the majority of my humanities classes have not served my ultimate goal: to get a job as a scientist. I suggest you do one of two things if you are going to stay the course: 1) Try to find the most reasonable professors you can. Oftentimes, different professors will teach a course in completely different manners. I dropped an English course (technical writing for science majors) last year because the instructor assigned lots of group work. She also cared how we "felt" about the formatting of scientific journals and political issues. Employers do not care how you feel about political issues or formatting. They want you to be able to communicate effectively. I took the exact same course last semester and my teacher was one of the best I've had. Every assignment pertained to how we would be communicating to employers and other scientists in the real world. She gave many examples of how improper communication can have disastrous results. The course was so relevant and useful just thinking about it makes me want to go thank her in person. Many colleges let you drop and add courses anytime within the first couple weeks of the semester. I suggest visiting many sections of the same course the first week to find which one is most palatable to you. Talking to the instructor about the nature of the course, looking at the syllabus, and checking out the required readings will often help you decide whether you will like a course or not. 2) Use this opportunity to exercise your thinking skills I was stuck in an English class where none of the required reading was philosophically sound. We drew pictures, acted out plays, and had lots of pointless discussions in a sophomore-level modern European literature class. However, I used this as an opportunity to hone my skills. I tried to figure out where the authors were coming from philosophically. I made every attempt in class discussions to defend my unique position. Overall, I think it was good for me, albeit not as useful as the technical writing class. Hope that helps.

"Results from observational studies suggest that back pain patients are more satisfied with chiropractic care than with medical care. In meta-analyses of clinical outcomes of spinal manipulation for back pain, some researchers have concluded that spinal manipulation is more effective than a placebo,whereas others have argued that no conclusion can be drawn from existing evidence." From: Comparing the Satisfaction of Low Back Pain Patients Randomized to Receive Medical or Chiropractic Care: Results From the UCLA Low-Back Pain Study. By: Hertzrnan-Miller, Ruth P., Morgenstern, Hal, Hurwitz, Eric L., Fei Yu, Adams, Alan H., Harber, Philip, Kominski, Gerald F., American Journal of Public Health, 00900036, Oct2002, Vol. 92, Issue 10 I wouldn't rule chiropractic out as an option if you have any kind of back pain. I had a constant pain problem a few years ago. For a few months, I did what the MDs told me to do. No luck. I still cried it hurt so much and tried to fix it with alcohol. I was willing to try anything within reason. I went to a chiropractor and was doing much better a few months later.

What you choose to wear is a reflection of your aesthetic values. I absolutely love Dagnys sense of style. I think her style reflects her values. I hope I can afford to dress like her when I have a career. How can you dress like something you don't look like? Certain clothes can enhance your bodies virtues and flaws. Why choose the ones that enhance your flaws? Seems like an Objectivist would want to optimize their appearance as much as possible rather than detract from it.

I live in Raleigh NC. That's only 3 hours away. Hang in there.

For you Rush fans out there... What is the significance of the name of the Temple of Syrinx? Why choose the word syrinx?

While Rand describes Wynand as "the man who could have been" in her notes, I think Keating could have "been" also, had he made different choices. She gave him all the tools to be a beautiful hero. He's reasonably intelligent and good-looking. But his philosophical errors are his downfall. This serves to further illustrate that men DO need philosophy in my mind.

What is the mechanism by which this happens? What is step two below? How does this happen? There's got to be some sensible philosophical/psychological explanation for these questions. 1. Man is irrational in one aspect of his life 2. ........ 3. Dire consequences and/or man becomes increasingly irrational in other areas of his life

I'm taking a class on technical writing for scientific audiences. My teacher taught us how to write resumes for scientific fields as a part of the course. I was never told to embellish or lie and was actually offered helpful hints on resume writing. Everyone is not going to offer you the same advice. Just because some people lie and recommend you do the same doesn't mean you should listen to them.

I would appreciate a lot of elaboration on this statement. What kind of consequences do you think are possible and/or most likely after this type of evasion?

I didn't like the ending either, but the rest of the series is great. I think Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman are perfect picks for the characters they're playing. I agree. Except for the ending.

Any reason you picked that particular pose? I fenced here in NC for about 6 years. I sadly can't afford it as a poor college student. I used to fence foil and epee and did pretty decently in womens competitions for both weapons here.

Hey Luke! Where are you studying philosophy in England?

The image of the fencer is interesting. Did you create that pose yourself or look at a photograph of a fencer? Do you fence at all?

QUOTE(mrocktor @ Feb 12 2007, 11:48 AM) * I see your point. However where "green" and "blue" are non-controversial and perceptually available, "masculine" and "feminine" are not. They are abstractions, and to this point vaguely defined abstractions. Green and blue are non-controversial because materials that appear blue absorb light at a maximum wavelength of 580-620 nm, blue-green materials absorb light at 620-680 nm, and green materials absorb light at 680-780 nm. The observed color depends on the intensity of the light as well. Many physical phenomena can cause a substance to appear blue or green. I don't really care to describe these in detail. However, the definitions of blue and green, as well as the nature of color and light, have been thoroughly describe by spectroscopists, analytical chemists, and physicists. These definitions are not really up for debate, unless someone cares to find an entirely new scientific way in which to explain how things are colored. However, I believe this thread has not sufficiently proven the meaning of the words masculine and feminine. Comparing this issue to accepted scientific facts is not a good analogy.

I logged in/viewed OO.net from both Spain and Amsterdam during that time period. It's not listed

I agree with this statement. I don't take into account the masculine or feminine nature of my choices.

I've had lots of difficulty getting restful sleep over the years. I used to wake up dozens of times in the middle of the night and still be very tired when I got up. I had a lot of success with pharmaceuticals and *always* sleep better when I'm taking them. I'm also much more productive when I've had good, restful sleep. I'd seriously recommend looking into getting some medication to help with your problem. It also helps me to get up a little earlier than is neccessary. Once I've had my coffee, breakfast, and a shower I feel much better. I also do fairly simple things, like check my e-mail or do dishes, for a few minutes in the morning to give my brain a little time to wake up.

Does Leonard Peikoff state why he thinks men tend to be more interested in philosophy?

It sounds like your girlfriend and I have similar problems. When I was a senior majoring in chemistry at ASU, I was the president of my fencing club, worked 20 hours a week, and was involved with two research groups on top of taking a ridiculous amount of classes. I studied as hard as I could given all the other demands on my time. Eventually, what studying I was doing didn't cut it and I felt like an idiot. I thought many of the things your girlfriend thought and I lost my motivation. The consequences were less than desirable and I'm still dealing with them today. I realize now that the best thing I could have done for myself was to quit doing everything else and focus all my mental energy on my studies. I should have quit my job and gotten more student loans instead. I should have put all I had into my studies. I wasn't, and I'm not, crippelled in terms of mental ability or IQ. Emotionally, I was a complete mess. Maybe your girlfriends emotions are overcoming her ability to use her mind to its fullest potential. If that's the case, find the root of the emotional problem and fix it. I notice you said "She thinks she's dumb". Maybe she isn't, maybe she just thinks she is. One of my favorite Thrice songs has a great line in it: "How will I know limits from lies if I never try?" I cut myself off at the knees emotionally so I wouldn't have to know my limits. I was scared to find out exactly how smart I was and what the limits of my abilities are. Maybe she's destroyed herself by having all these negative emotions because she doesn't want to know exactly what the limits of her abilities are. You can always say "if only I had motivation, I could make an A on this test" when you're really not motivated because you don't want to know the true extent of your mental abilities. Having attended two different universities for chemistry as an undergrad, I've found out that classes at one university can be infinitely easier than at another, even if both programs are ACS certified and the class titles are the same. I used to study quantum mechanics like hell at ASU and make terrible grades. Now I have a teacher who actually explains how to use the equations that will be on our tests and it's made a world of difference. Having someone explain things to you in a way you can understand on a deep, fundamental level makes a world of difference in undergraduate chemistry classes. I've tutored a few kids who think they understand things, but when pressed, do not. However, once I explain things to them in a way they understand, they've improved significantly on tests. Finding someone to study with or finding a tutor can make a huge difference in your test grades too. In chemistry especially, studying more isn't necessarily studying effectively. Does your girlfriend have problems with one particular professor or one particular type of class? I love biochemistry and inorganic and organic chemistry. However, quantum mechanics and physical chemistry are no fun for me. I take the classes in the types of chemistry I don't like and realize I just have to get through it, even though I don't like it. I realize I have to get through it so I can get an undergraduate degree and go on to get a job and go to graduate school. Once I look at the big picture, I feel better because I know the drudgery can't last forever. One day I'll be free of the types of chemistry that bore me and I'll be able to do interesting, fun chemistry all day. I'm sorry if my thoughts on this don't make sense or are disjointed. It's not something I talk about often, or at all.

Awesome! I'm moving to Raleigh in August.

CSI- If you haven't seen this, you really need to. Grissom is one of the most morally upstanding characters in both TV and movies. And he's not bad looking for an old guy. House, M.D. - Hugh Laurie does an excellent job as House. This isn't your typical hospital drama either. Frasier Law and Order Southpark

I'm also afraid of heights. I have trouble sleeping on the top bunk of a bunk bed, running on an elevated track, and standing on my third-floor balcony. However, my fear has become less potent lately. Earlier this summer, I took a vacation in Las Vegas. I went on top of the Stratosphere, the fourth tallest building in the United States. There's a ride at the very top where you're strapped in a chair and go all the way up and down very quickly. After crying for about ten minutes, I was finally convinced that I should go on this ride. I screamed the whole way and opened my eyes at the top. I also went on the roller coaster at the New York New York that goes up pretty high. I was afraid of that ride initially, but once I got on I found it rather enjoyable. The outcome of this experience was very positive. I now know that I can be very high up and still be physically safe. When fear threatens to overcome me, I remember that I was on top of that building and overcame one of the strongest fears in my life in that one moment. I'd recommend trying to overcome your fear in that manner: just dive in headfirst rather than going in inch by inch . However, what works for one person doesn't always work for another.

Masculine: http://www.cordair.com/anjou/images/mercury.jpg Feminine: http://www.cordair.com/axton/images/world1.jpg Romance: http://www.cordair.com/mack/images/crescendoa.jpg P.S. I've admired these pieces for a long time and I'm being completely honest in my answers. I didn't intend to copy anyone else's responses.

I think my question relates more to parenting as such.