On 10/25/2011 4:43 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Well such a basic assumption is old and of course every one tries to
> avoid it and yes you don't know nor can't explain everything through
> science now, as are many thing in nature, nor you haven't seen how and
> what those cases are all about you're generalizing out of ignorance
> because you saw a few cases and wrongly assume situations will repeat
> the same for the most part. And because something can't be explained it
> doesn't mean is not indication something is going on, you need to open
> your mind to toher possibilities and stop that attitude "Give me facts
> or give me death!", you're like the ignorant which hunters, only seeing
> what you want to see, science and nothings else.
Ugh.. Its the, "Different ways of knowing", argument, combined with what 
can best be called the, "If we keep doing it, maybe next time it will 
happen a different way!", argument, which most people would define as a 
sign of, if not potentially insanity, then at least extreme wishful 
thinking.

Here is a hint, every other "way of knowing" has been a dismal failure 
at providing explanations, facts, evidence, or anything that might 
otherwise result in progress towards doing anything useful with the 
"knowledge" thus produced. When someone can show *any* example to the 
contrary, which doesn't, at some point, rely on scientific experiment, 
repeatability, and elimination of other possible explanations *before* 
reaching something *usable*... well, then we will open our minds to the 
above "possibilities".

Now, I need to go and see if, this time, the pot I put on the stove 
freezes, instead of boiling. Apparently, I need to open my mind, and a 
few repeated cases of it boiling isn't sufficient reason to imagine that 
I know what will happen the next time.

Post a reply to this message