The Dude wrote:There's a codified excuse for when you don't get the "right" answer -- that is, "God won't be tempted" or "God is testing your faith."
Actually, those are only reasons why you can't falsify it for me. However, I believe I can (in principle) falsify it for mysef (just as I can verify it for myself).
No, those are reasons why I can't falsify it for myself.
How can you falsify it for yourself? Please explain. I think the only way is if you reject the entire methodology as pseudoscience. There is no actual falsification within the methodology.
The Dude wrote:There's a codified excuse for when you don't get the "right" answer -- that is, "God won't be tempted" or "God is testing your faith."
Actually, those are only reasons why you can't falsify it for me. However, I believe I can (in principle) falsify it for mysef (just as I can verify it for myself).
No, those are reasons why I can't falsify it for myself.
How can you falsify it for yourself? Please explain. I think the only way is if you reject the entire methodology as pseudoscience. There is no actual falsification within the methodology.
As far as I know, you have falsified it for yourself via various means. I simply haven't experienced those means.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
VegasRefugee wrote:Eigenvalues are not THAT hard to visualize and apply to QM.
And yet here you are trying to use the mundane world to constrain the world of faith. You tell me who's insane.
There is no higher plane of existence you can place your imaginary friends into. Therefore, the mundane world is the ONLY plane of existence you and I and everyone else turns to for validation of the collective reality. To believe otherwise is insanity.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
The Dude wrote:How can you falsify it for yourself? Please explain. I think the only way is if you reject the entire methodology as pseudoscience. There is no actual falsification within the methodology.
As far as I know, you have falsified it for yourself via various means. I simply haven't experienced those means.
Maybe I wasn't clear, but I asked how you can falsify this, which you said you could do in principle.
What I'm saying is:
falsification = reject the whole method
Within the method there is no falsification. In principle.
(okay, I have to leave now, so I won't see your reply for a while)
The Dude wrote:Maybe I wasn't clear, but I asked how you can falsify this, which you said you could do in principle.
What I'm saying is:
falsification = reject the whole method
Within the method there is no falsification. In principle.
(okay, I have to leave now, so I won't see your reply for a while)
Maybe I still don't understand, but this is how I would falsify my experience (that lead me to faith in God and His church):
I believe that one could know it was false one truly and sincerely (in their own honest estimation, not mine) tried to follow the commandments and found that it didn't work--that the promises were not true--that they do not find happiness and enlightenment from it.
I would not use the excuse that if I receive a contradictory experience that I must not have been sincere. I think I could know for myself in my own honest estimation. I would not use the excuse that "God is testing my faith" or whatever. If I don't find happiness and peace from keeping the commandments (say, after a few months), then I would consider His doctrine to be falsified.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
The Dude wrote:Maybe I wasn't clear, but I asked how you can falsify this, which you said you could do in principle.
What I'm saying is:
falsification = reject the whole method
Within the method there is no falsification. In principle.
(okay, I have to leave now, so I won't see your reply for a while)
Maybe I still don't understand, but this is how I would falsify my experience (that leads to faith in God and His church):
I believe that one could know it was false one truly and sincerely (in their own honest estimation, not mine) tried to follow the commandments and found that it didn't work--that the promises were not true--that they do not find happiness and enlightenment from it.
I would not use the excuse that if I receive a contradictory experience that I must not have been sincere. I think I could know for myself in my own honest estimation. I would not use the excuse that "God is testing my faith" or whatever. If I don't find happiness and peace from keeping the commandments (say, after a few months), then I would consider His doctrine to be falsified.
Try to define a test that works for everyone who performs the test. One cannot say that all those who follow mormonisms tenets are happy. as a matter of fact, the amount of prescriptions for depression in Utah are one of the countries highest. Circumstantial I know but you see where im going.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
VegasRefugee wrote:Try to define a test that works for everyone who performs the test. One cannot say that all those who follow mormonisms tenets are happy. as a matter of fact, the amount of prescriptions for depression in Utah are one of the countries highest. Circumstantial I know but you see where im going.
And I'm saying that the difference between science and religion is that their misery cannot falsify it for me. It can only falsify it for them. I would have to experience that misery in order to falsify the claim.
Again, I haven't worked out all the details, but I conted that religion and science are both valid, indeed important, ways of obtaining knowledge of our existance.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
VegasRefugee wrote:Try to define a test that works for everyone who performs the test. One cannot say that all those who follow mormonisms tenets are happy. as a matter of fact, the amount of prescriptions for depression in Utah are one of the countries highest. Circumstantial I know but you see where im going.
And I'm saying that the difference between science and religion is that their misery cannot falsify it for me. It can only falsify it for them. I would have to experience that misery in order to falsify the claim.
Again, I haven't worked out all the details, but I conted that religion and science are both valid, indeed important, ways of obtaining knowledge of our existance.
If science and religion both have value then they would not contradict, which they do.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning