Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

RingingSword · Nov 19, 2006, 10:58 pm

Correspondents,

Please confirm, refute, qualify or refine the following assertions:

Science and Philosophy Defined – scientific methodology – an empirical procedure for accurately measuring material phenomena; scientific theory – a statement of how to go about measuring material phenomena. Philosophy – a cognitive procedure for accurately assessing the meaning of empirical measurements of material phenomena within the engulfing context of metaphysics i.e. within the ultimate picture of reality; metaphysics – a discipline that assesses and articulates the logical operations and truth content of axiomatic statements.

Zhavric · Nov 20, 2006, 11:50 am

A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been proven valid by multiple experiments.

RingingSword · Nov 20, 2006, 12:12 pm

An experiment is an elaborate measurement of something. When it validates an hypothesis, its measurements conform to the prescription for measurements of the hypothesis.

Zhavric · Nov 20, 2006, 12:33 pm

While logically accurate, that sounds clumsy to me. Meh... just a matter of personal preference, I suppose.

Nathan Struth · Nov 20, 2006, 01:02 pm

How can an axiomatic statement have truth if there is no proof for it?

Def Axiom: A statement assumed with no proof.

iahag · Nov 20, 2006, 02:33 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Nathan Struth

How can an axiomatic statement have truth if there is no proof for it?

Def Axiom: A statement assumed with no proof.

Its odd isnt it? All complexity often stems from some very very simple proposition/axiom. For example, all things in special relativity is derived from the assumption that the speed of light is constant for all observers. This simple statement stems a mountain of bizarre concepts.

I think its because proofs often require a certain language derived from axiomic statements/concepts and definitions (which are always true). Its a bizarre thing.

RingingSword · Nov 20, 2006, 09:19 pm

Zhavric,

I'm having a little breakthrough as far as expressing common, important things (science, philosophy) in plain language I genuinely understand. At this point, the translation is a first draft and clumsy.

Nathan Struth,

Quote:

Nathan Struth: How can an axiomatic statement have truth if there is no proof for it?

Def Axiom: A statement assumed with no proof. Def Axiom: A statement assumed with no proof.

You ask an important question. The job of the philosopher is to examine foundational beliefs for truth content. If a given axiomatic statement can be shown to be false within a real context, then a new picture of reality emerges. I think (anybody know if I'm mistaken?) some of Einstein's relativistic contexts show Newtonian axioms to be false.

As a scientist, Einstein wasn't directly concerned with the impact of relativity upon the general picture of reality; more properly, he was concerned with the conceptualization and execution of measurements of relativistic phenomena.

It is the job of the philosopher to assess the impact of relativistic phenomena upon the general picture of reality.

This distiction between the respective jobs of scientist and philosopher is the gist of this thread.

iahag,

I agree that axioms are strange animals. How the apparantly diverse phenomenal world reduces down to simplicity fascinates me.

Castle · Nov 23, 2006, 12:15 am

Quote:

Quote by: RingingSword

scientific theory – a statement of how to go about measuring material phenomena.

Scientific Theory- A prediction of what one will observe in a certain circumstance based on inductive reasoning (pattern recognition)

Nathan Struth · Nov 24, 2006, 11:14 pm

Umm...THe limit of the speed of light isn't a complete axoim. I saw how to find that it's true. Unfortunately I didn't remember the book I read, From Pythagoras to Einstein, BY Friedrichs. THey showed how if two vectors multiplied = 0 you can use the pythagoream theorem to demonstrate E = mc^2. I completely forgot how to do this. ALl I remember is that you only need two formulas. p = mv. and Ke = 1/2mv^2.

Jakob · Nov 25, 2006, 12:38 am

I had to do a similar proof in Chemistry. At the highschool level. It's a basic proof, actually, that only takes a small amount of intellect to prove. (Like basic algebra).

iahag · Nov 25, 2006, 03:34 pm

Quote:

Umm...THe limit of the speed of light isn't a complete axoim.

Very true, nothing in described in the physical reality is a 'complete' axiom. Although, egoists' from the middle ages would strongly disagree with you.

Nov 19, 2006, 10:58 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
RingingSword Molten Ash Posts: 86	Science & Philosophy Defined Correspondents, Please confirm, refute, qualify or refine the following assertions: Science and Philosophy Defined – scientific methodology – an empirical procedure for accurately measuring material phenomena; scientific theory – a statement of how to go about measuring material phenomena. Philosophy – a cognitive procedure for accurately assessing the meaning of empirical measurements of material phenomena within the engulfing context of metaphysics i.e. within the ultimate picture of reality; metaphysics – a discipline that assesses and articulates the logical operations and truth content of axiomatic statements.

Nov 20, 2006, 11:50 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
Zhavric Made of pure win. Posts: 3,807	A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been proven valid by multiple experiments. Theists: supplying volconvo with lose since 2004.

Nov 20, 2006, 12:33 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Zhavric Made of pure win. Posts: 3,807	While logically accurate, that sounds clumsy to me. Meh... just a matter of personal preference, I suppose. Theists: supplying volconvo with lose since 2004.

Nov 20, 2006, 01:02 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
Nathan Struth don't care Location: NY Posts: 267	How can an axiomatic statement have truth if there is no proof for it? Def Axiom: A statement assumed with no proof. I'm just a fool caught in the rat race of life (Nathan Struth) please help me solve world hunger, It's hard to do it alone.

Nov 24, 2006, 11:14 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Nathan Struth don't care Location: NY Posts: 267	Umm...THe limit of the speed of light isn't a complete axoim. I saw how to find that it's true. Unfortunately I didn't remember the book I read, From Pythagoras to Einstein, BY Friedrichs. THey showed how if two vectors multiplied = 0 you can use the pythagoream theorem to demonstrate E = mc^2. I completely forgot how to do this. ALl I remember is that you only need two formulas. p = mv. and Ke = 1/2mv^2. I'm just a fool caught in the rat race of life (Nathan Struth) please help me solve world hunger, It's hard to do it alone.

Nov 20, 2006, 12:12 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
RingingSword Molten Ash Posts: 86	An experiment is an elaborate measurement of something. When it validates an hypothesis, its measurements conform to the prescription for measurements of the hypothesis.

Nov 25, 2006, 12:38 am	#10 (permalink) (top)
Jakob Molten Ash Posts: 68	I had to do a similar proof in Chemistry. At the highschool level. It's a basic proof, actually, that only takes a small amount of intellect to prove. (Like basic algebra). 20 million soldiers can't be wrong? You'd be surprised.