|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 11:17:24 [Permalink]
|
Jerome wrote: I am not selling something irrelevant and unneeded.
In this instance these scientist are. |
What an ignorant, asinine statement. And hypocritical after you complimented my art just over a week ago and offered to help me sell it. So my pretty pictures are apparently worthy of making money on, but scientists' curiosity about mummies isn't?
Scientific discoveries build on each other. Most science is done just for the sake of curiosity and the desire to accumulate knowledge about the world. From that building of knowledge, useful things often come out, but many are totally useless beyond the pure enjoyment of discovery and possession of knowledge. Sort of like art.
Both art for art's sake and science for science's sake are noble and very human pursuits. Why is it noble for a doctor to save someone's life? Why is it noble for an engineer to design something that will prolong peoples' lives or improve the quality of their lives? Because human life itself is deemed worthy and good by humans! And part of life is acting out of curiosity, just like part of life is the creation and enjoyment of aesthetics.
A SCAM is something done ONLY to make money. If scientists were really scam artists, they would not be acting out of curiosity. They would not care about facts or get joy out of discovery. They would only care about money. But that is absurd to think about scientists considering the amount of school and years they must spend doing hard research in order to maintain their careers. There are much better ways to make even more money and have even more time to enjoy one's money. Hell, there are careers where the whole primary purpose is to make more money. People who want money go into other fields, not science. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 07/20/2007 11:21:30 |
 |
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 11:52:22 [Permalink]
|
| Hmm a well crafted rebuttal, Marf, but can we really trust the opinion of an anti-zardozian? Unfortunately, like SmallBrain logic bounces off Jerome like a buckyball shot at gold foil. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 07/20/2007 : 20:31:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ricky
Scientific discoveries build on each other. Most science is done just for the sake of curiosity and the desire to accumulate knowledge about the world. From that building of knowledge, useful things often come out, but many are totally useless beyond the pure enjoyment of discovery and possession of knowledge. Sort of like art. |
But at the same time, there are discoveries for which use is found later. I only know of examples in math as that's my field, but two good ones are Boolean Algebra and the Euler Phi function. Both were discovered before the 20th century and both have become heavily used thanks to computers.
|
Always a total dunce in math (yes, Jerome, a "stone-headed" one), I once asked my high school math teacher what was the practical use of imaginary numbers. He was stumped in thinking of any example, but he swore there were "many." I now think he was right, but that he also should have been able to answer the question.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 20:31:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
Jerome wrote: I am not selling something irrelevant and unneeded.
In this instance these scientist are. |
What an ignorant, asinine statement. And hypocritical after you complimented my art just over a week ago and offered to help me sell it. So my pretty pictures are apparently worthy of making money on, but scientists' curiosity about mummies isn't?
Scientific discoveries build on each other. Most science is done just for the sake of curiosity and the desire to accumulate knowledge about the world. From that building of knowledge, useful things often come out, but many are totally useless beyond the pure enjoyment of discovery and possession of knowledge. Sort of like art.
Both art for art's sake and science for science's sake are noble and very human pursuits. Why is it noble for a doctor to save someone's life? Why is it noble for an engineer to design something that will prolong peoples' lives or improve the quality of their lives? Because human life itself is deemed worthy and good by humans! And part of life is acting out of curiosity, just like part of life is the creation and enjoyment of aesthetics.
A SCAM is something done ONLY to make money. If scientists were really scam artists, they would not be acting out of curiosity. They would not care about facts or get joy out of discovery. They would only care about money. But that is absurd to think about scientists considering the amount of school and years they must spend doing hard research in order to maintain their careers. There are much better ways to make even more money and have even more time to enjoy one's money. Hell, there are careers where the whole primary purpose is to make more money. People who want money go into other fields, not science.
|
First off, art is neither irrelevant nor unneeded. The geology of long dead monarchs is. The bulk of what you are saying about science building upon itself is agreed. The problem, in this instance is you have a country that still uses child labor whist spending money on the genealogy of long dead monarchs. There is little science in this endeavor; only resources used to support these particular scientists at the expense of child laborers. There is little benefit and much suffering . My scale would weigh to the economic hardships that cause conditions in which children must labor.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 20:34:48 [Permalink]
|
m^3(x-y^4)/z = Action
m=potential funding possible / 1,000
x=number of scientists involved
y=number of politicians invoved
z 1 to 9 based on the average administrative costs of the companies involved, reflected inversely (10 % admin cost=9, 90=1)
The highr the ACTION number, the better chance that the finding will be validated. THe lower, the better chance it is ignored.
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 20:56:41 [Permalink]
|
Jerome intoned:| First off, art is neither irrelevant nor unneeded. The geology of long dead monarchs is. |
Uh, "geology"? Oh! Later, you use the word, "genealogy."
| The problem, in this instance is you have a country that still uses child labor whist spending money on the genealogy of long dead monarchs. There is little benefit and much suffering . My scale would weigh to the economic hardships that cause conditions in which children must labor. |
By your logic, I suppose that the US is equally wrong in routing electricity to most homes, so long as there are Americans who have to use kerosene lamps?
| There is little science in this endeavor; only resources used to support these particular scientists at the expense of child laborers. |
Little science? What are they using instead, astrology? (Please provide evidence!) You almost seem to imply that the scientists have actively enslaved kids to do their digging. Instead, the boost to tourism deriving from the science is one of the few international props to Egypt's whole economy, perhaps making the difference between little Achmed scratching out a precarious living, and his starving to death outright.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 21:14:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Jerome intoned:| First off, art is neither irrelevant nor unneeded. The geology of long dead monarchs is. |
Uh, "geology"? Oh! Later, you use the word, "genealogy." |
Ohh, they were not looking at the layer in which the mummies were found.  Guess I missed that one, the second spelling was correct!
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 21:18:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
First off, art is neither irrelevant nor unneeded. The geology of long dead monarchs is. The bulk of what you are saying about science building upon itself is agreed. The problem, in this instance is you have a country that still uses child labor whist spending money on the genealogy of long dead monarchs. There is little science in this endeavor; only resources used to support these particular scientists at the expense of child laborers. There is little benefit and much suffering . My scale would weigh to the economic hardships that cause conditions in which children must labor. |
"Little benefit" not being "no benefit," your argument has changed. It's obviously not that it's "irrelevant and unneeded," it's that it's less relevant and less needed than something you feel is more important.
So why pick on Egyptian mummies when there are billions more dollars being spent on particle physics, cosmology, paleontology, the Space Shuttle, Moon and Mars missions, a war in Iraq and especially the butt-stupid International Space Station while even a single child on this planet suffers, Jerome?
But why stop there? I bet if we thought real hard, we could come up with at least a trillion bucks a year being spent on things less important than suffering children. What's next on the chopping block? How about all the overtime pay for bookstore employees when Harry Potter books get released at friggin' midnight? Dammit, missed preventing that waste by mere hours. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 21:19:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
By your logic, I suppose that the US is equally wrong in routing electricity to most homes, so long as there are Americans who have to use kerosene lamps? |
If the US funds the search for the genealogy of long dead monarchs at the expense of children I would be against that. I am pretty sure child labor is not a problem in America today.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 21:24:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Little science? What are they using instead, astrology? (Please provide evidence!) You almost seem to imply that the scientists have actively enslaved kids to do their digging. Instead, the boost to tourism deriving from the science is one of the few international props to Egypt's whole economy, perhaps making the difference between little Achmed scratching out a precarious living, and his starving to death outright. |
The context was the building of information that marfknox wrote about. What will science learn that can be built upon concerning the genealogy of long dead monarchs at the expense of solving the child labor problem in Egypt.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 21:28:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
"Little benefit" not being "no benefit," your argument has changed. It's obviously not that it's "irrelevant and unneeded," it's that it's less relevant and less needed than something you feel is more important. |
My argument has not changed. All knowledge has some benefit; this potential knowledge is irrelevant and unneeded.
The other things you wrote about is an argument concerning a camels nose; thus not relevant to this talk.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2007 : 22:17:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
My argument has not changed. All knowledge has some benefit; this potential knowledge is irrelevant and unneeded.
The other things you wrote about is an argument concerning a camels nose; thus not relevant to this talk. |
It was hardly a slippery-slope argument. My point was (and has been) that what you consider to be "irrelevant and unneeded" is subective and bizarrely lacking in insight into the greater scheme of things. The money that will be spent on dead pharaohs is but a miniscule percentage of that which the U.S. has spent on the ISS already, but you're not screaming about that utter waste. Instead, you're focused on the corpses, the testing of which will ultimately cost a tiny fraction of what would be required to end child suffering in Egypt alone.
Say you need to come up with an extra $100 for car repairs that you don't have. Your position is analogous to you laying into your wife for buying a gumdrop for a nickel while your kid blows $50 at iTunes without you saying a word. If you're going to decry wasteful spending, then get your priorities straight. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
What does science do when doubts are raised?
