main
side
curve
  1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

JCC Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo science!

Discussion in 'Community' started by VadersLaMent, Sep 4, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Quixotic-Sith

    Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 22, 2001
    It's more than philosophy of science. We're talking epistemology, ontology, etc. Hell, the basic question of ontology is "Why is there something rather than nothing?" Natural dovetail with physics. ;)
     
  2. Lord Vivec

    Lord Vivec Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Apr 17, 2006
    EDIT: Even if it jives with physics, one should refrain if possible from drawing philosophical conclusions from physical theories.
     
  3. Quixotic-Sith

    Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 22, 2001
    I can read, Vivec, and rather well. There's just more to the relationship between science and philosophy. Quoting yourself does less to foster discussion than simply indicating what fields in philosophy you want to divorce from science, which lets us have a conversation.

    Edit:

    Just saw the edit.

    Again, it depends on the conclusion being reached. But the naturalistic fallacy is a big concern.
     
  4. Lord Vivec

    Lord Vivec Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Quix, the goal wasn't to create an iron curtain between science and philosophy nor to segregate various fields of philosophy. I wouldn't even attempt to do that knowing my lack of study on the subject.

    The goal was to prevent the average layperson from drawing metaphysical conclusions from physical theories, i.e. Classical physics means a deterministic universe, quantum mechanics means chaos, order means god, etc.
     
  5. Quixotic-Sith

    Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 22, 2001
    I'm cool with that. :)
     
  6. malkieD2

    malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 7, 2002
    I'm feeling the love in the thread :) Not sure about these new boards though - seem a bit busy and cluttered :p I appreciate I'm pee'ing all over the extensive hard work of getting this place built and bringing over the old database. I guess it brings finally brings the boards into the 21st century though. I'm even using forumrunner on my iPhone :D

    In other news I visited Australia this year for a wedding, and I'm going back to the US soon for a long weekend in NYC.

    I'm stilling tackling the diseases of the world one at a time, but only really having an impact in respiratory disorders.
    Having only have one publication in 2011 I'm on for 4 this year - which is brilliant given publishing work in my occupation isn't valued in the same way as it is in academia.

    Great to be back though :)
     
    Juliet316 likes this.
  7. SithLordDarthRichie

    SithLordDarthRichie CR Emeritus: London star 8

    Registered:
    Oct 3, 2003
    Certainly Peter Higgs should get one.
     
  8. jp-30

    jp-30 Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2000
    I'm hoping Andrew Boson isn't overlooked.
     
  9. jp-30

    jp-30 Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2000
    TJCCINAGAIUTB.
     
  10. malkieD2

    malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Well, it hasn't been since I was demoted, not that I'm bitter obviously.
    It's good to see so many old faces still here at the new place. I didn't register at the temp boards.
    I guess with new boards there's a chance to build a new environment and increase membership.
     
    VadersLaMent likes this.
  11. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
  12. malkieD2

    malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 7, 2002
    and

    We can do that in a dish, we have as yet been unable to translate that into feasible therapies. The problem is delivering the agents in vivo, and it's proven impossible this far. the RNAi approach has been largely dismissed as impossible, after many companies pumped billions into research. It's a great in vitro tool, but unlikely to ever be a therapy. Greater chance using gene therapy via viral infection, but that's still a tall order at present.
     
    VadersLaMent likes this.
  13. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
  14. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
  15. Ramza

    Ramza Administrator Emeritus star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA VIP

    Registered:
    Jul 13, 2008
    That's completely untrue for the standard reason commonly documented with robotic car issues - insurance. Unless there's a massive upheaval in liability law (Haha yeah right) this'll never pan out.
     
  16. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
    It depends on the reliability of the technology.
     
  17. darthhelinith

    darthhelinith Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Feb 10, 2009
    I for one welcome our new robotic cars.
     
  18. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
    I'll kill this off and someone else can go ahead and do it. You might want to discuss a separation of science threads versus space exploration. Each did rather well on the temp forums.
     
  19. Darth_wanderguard

    Darth_wanderguard Game Host star 6 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Apr 26, 2005
    I heard that science doesn't like minorities. True story. Also, creationism.
     
  20. Barriss_Coffee

    Barriss_Coffee Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jun 29, 2003
    I worked in a genetics lab briefly with a creationist. She certainly had a uh... answer to everything. Sort of like if you stuck an atheist in the Vatican Council.

    Actually, that would be a great premise for a sitcom...
     
    GrandAdmiralJello likes this.
  21. Darth_wanderguard

    Darth_wanderguard Game Host star 6 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Fanatics are generally similar personalities regardless of their opinions, I've found.


    "You'll note I wasn't talking about philosophy of science and the like. Hence my mention of metaphysics.
    EDIT: Even if it jives with physics, one should refrain if possible from drawing philosophical conclusions from physical theories."

    I don't know if I agree with that, Vivec. In fact I'd say it's the other way around. Forming philosophical conclusions based on tangible physical theories doesn't sound so bad to me. I would be more troubled by forming physical theories based on sentimental philosophical thought.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.