Looking below the surface

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator: Metacrock

Looking below the surface

Postby The Pixie on Thu May 18, 2017 10:00 am

Metacrock said recently:
Because you are only looking at the bits that are on the surface, that's the natural it's empirical. This is what Tillich means when he links atheism with "surface level of being." You are only thinking of what you can see. If you want to deal with morality or meaning or anything below the surface then you do need SN.

Can anyone give any example of looking below the surface, or deeper thinking?

Why should we think this deeper thinking matches reality?
The Pixie
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby Jim B. on Thu May 18, 2017 2:32 pm

The Pixie wrote:Metacrock said recently:
Because you are only looking at the bits that are on the surface, that's the natural it's empirical. This is what Tillich means when he links atheism with "surface level of being." You are only thinking of what you can see. If you want to deal with morality or meaning or anything below the surface then you do need SN.

Can anyone give any example of looking below the surface, or deeper thinking?

Why should we think this deeper thinking matches reality?


Ethics, meta-ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, consciousness. None of these appear to be resolvable through empirical means. Before we can begin to wonder whether something "matches reality" we first have to have a grasp on what 'reality' might be. Before we can apply empirical methods to grasp reality, we have to tacitly accept the assumptions that empiricism is premised on.
Jim B.
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby The Pixie on Thu May 18, 2017 3:59 pm

Jim B. wrote:Ethics, meta-ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, consciousness. None of these appear to be resolvable through empirical means.

In what sense are these "deeper" or "below the surface"?
Jim B. wrote:Before we can begin to wonder whether something "matches reality" we first have to have a grasp on what 'reality' might be. Before we can apply empirical methods to grasp reality, we have to tacitly accept the assumptions that empiricism is premised on.

Say that that is so, what does theology (or anything else other than science) bring to the table?
The Pixie
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby Jim B. on Fri May 19, 2017 3:32 pm

The Pixie wrote:
Jim B. wrote:Ethics, meta-ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, consciousness. None of these appear to be resolvable through empirical means.

In what sense are these "deeper" or "below the surface"?
Jim B. wrote:Before we can begin to wonder whether something "matches reality" we first have to have a grasp on what 'reality' might be. Before we can apply empirical methods to grasp reality, we have to tacitly accept the assumptions that empiricism is premised on.

Say that that is so, what does theology (or anything else other than science) bring to the table?


"Deeper" or "below the surface" by greater generality and explanatory power, and also by possibly providing the necessary and sufficient conditions for empiricism. If we're trying t understand the falling of objects to the ground, an understanding of gravity is at a "deeper" level than just looking at individual phenomena, which is pure empiricism.
Jim B.
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby The Pixie on Sat May 20, 2017 1:53 am

Jim B. wrote:"Deeper" or "below the surface" by greater generality and explanatory power, and also by possibly providing the necessary and sufficient conditions for empiricism. If we're trying t understand the falling of objects to the ground, an understanding of gravity is at a "deeper" level than just looking at individual phenomena, which is pure empiricism.

Okay.

So sticking with the gravity example, what is the deeper explanation that science has not (and presumably cannot) find?

And why should we suppose it is true?
The Pixie
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby Jim B. on Sat May 20, 2017 6:51 pm

The Pixie wrote:Okay.

So sticking with the gravity example, what is the deeper explanation that science has not (and presumably cannot) find?

And why should we suppose it is true?


No, that was an analogy showing what a 'deeper' explanation within science would be like. And presumably there are even 'deeper' scientific explanations for gravity that will be discovered in the future.
Jim B.
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby The Pixie on Sun May 21, 2017 3:18 am

Jim B. wrote:No, that was an analogy showing what a 'deeper' explanation within science would be like. And presumably there are even 'deeper' scientific explanations for gravity that will be discovered in the future.

So can you think of any example at all where we have a "deeper" explanation that science cannot offer?

And can you offer any reason to suppose it is true?
The Pixie
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby Jim B. on Sun May 21, 2017 3:07 pm

The Pixie wrote:
Jim B. wrote:No, that was an analogy showing what a 'deeper' explanation within science would be like. And presumably there are even 'deeper' scientific explanations for gravity that will be discovered in the future.

So can you think of any example at all where we have a "deeper" explanation that science cannot offer?

And can you offer any reason to suppose it is true?


Sure. An understanding of the assumptions that science must take for granted in order to be and function at all. We know that through reason.
An understanding of the scope and limits of scientific investigation. We know this through an understanding of the nature of science.
The knowledge that I am conscious and that I am experiencing red and the extrapolation from that fact that all instances of this kind of knowledge are immediately given and unimpeachable.
The knowledge that torturing children for fun is morally wrong.
The knowledge that it is impossible that all promises are broken and that all paintings are forgeries.
The knowledge that all bachelors are unmarried men.
The knowledge that pleasure is good and pain is evil.
None of these, except for the one about consciousness, is unimpeachable just as no scientific datum is unimpeachable. Reason would indicate that they're at least as certain, and probably more certain, than any scientific claim.
Jim B.
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby The Pixie on Sun May 21, 2017 3:38 pm

Jim B. wrote:Sure. An understanding of the assumptions that science must take for granted in order to be and function at all. We know that through reason.
An understanding of the scope and limits of scientific investigation. We know this through an understanding of the nature of science.
The knowledge that I am conscious and that I am experiencing red and the extrapolation from that fact that all instances of this kind of knowledge are immediately given and unimpeachable.
The knowledge that torturing children for fun is morally wrong.
The knowledge that it is impossible that all promises are broken and that all paintings are forgeries.
The knowledge that all bachelors are unmarried men.
The knowledge that pleasure is good and pain is evil.
None of these, except for the one about consciousness, is unimpeachable just as no scientific datum is unimpeachable. Reason would indicate that they're at least as certain, and probably more certain, than any scientific claim.

Okay, thanks. None from theology then. interesting.

In what sense is, for example, the knowledge that all bachelors are unmarried men deeper than science?
The Pixie
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: Looking below the surface

Postby Jim B. on Mon May 22, 2017 2:12 pm

The Pixie wrote:
Jim B. wrote:Sure. An understanding of the assumptions that science must take for granted in order to be and function at all. We know that through reason.
An understanding of the scope and limits of scientific investigation. We know this through an understanding of the nature of science.
The knowledge that I am conscious and that I am experiencing red and the extrapolation from that fact that all instances of this kind of knowledge are immediately given and unimpeachable.
The knowledge that torturing children for fun is morally wrong.
The knowledge that it is impossible that all promises are broken and that all paintings are forgeries.
The knowledge that all bachelors are unmarried men.
The knowledge that pleasure is good and pain is evil.
None of these, except for the one about consciousness, is unimpeachable just as no scientific datum is unimpeachable. Reason would indicate that they're at least as certain, and probably more certain, than any scientific claim.

Okay, thanks. None from theology then. interesting.

In what sense is, for example, the knowledge that all bachelors are unmarried men deeper than science?


It's an example of logical relations that determine all thought and language, including scientific. In that sense, it's 'prior' to, and broader than, empirical knowledge.
Jim B.
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Next

Return to Adventure of Faith (Religion/Spirituality)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron