Charles Fort (1874-1932) was a fascinating figure that dared to challenge the scientific status quo. Fort specialized in the collection data that he declared to be "damned" because it refused to fit in the acceptable range of scientific orthodoxy.
Here are some of the stated goals of his eponymous Fortean Society:
-
To remove the halo from the head of Science.
-
To make human beings think.
-
To destroy scientists' faith in their own works and thus force a general return to the truly scientific principle of "temporary acceptance".
-
To inform the general public of the political and self-preservative character of most work done under the ambiguous cloak of "pure" science, principally astronomy and physics.
-
To inform the general public that the "cosmic order" Science pretends to have established in the flux of existence is simply a mental discipline imposed upon mankind as an expedient to enforce social and economic "order" under what must be--at longest--an ephemeral status quo.
-
To prevent scientists from further development of any hierarchy, Brain Trust, Court of Wisdom, authoritarian dictatorship of intelligence or learning, which would--if permitted--lead to a more powerful domination and consequent paralysis of human mentality than any ever imposed by any Church or State or Press in history, not excluding any of the ideologies current today.
-
To destroy awe for Authority, as such, in the youth of the world at as tender an age as possible.
-
To provide the means for the perpetuation of dissent from any and all dogmas as long as time shall last.
What do you think? Are we not the spiritual successors, the very embodiment of the aims of the Fortean Society from a century ago?
They were heavily maligned in their time, as are we. We dare to challenge the $cientific orthodoxy, because it must be challenged.
Here are the published works of Charles Fort:
The Book of the Damned (1919)
New Lands (1923)
Lo! (1931)
Wild Talents (1932)
No. Simply telling about Darvin theory.
OR'DINARY, adjective [Latin ordinarius.] - "according to established order" aka allegory for flow + TEM'PORARY, adjective [Latin temporarius.] aka allegory for form + CONCERN, verb transitive [Latin, to separate, sift, divide.] aka allegory for form divided through the momentum of flow.
How is that suggested Darwinism (or any -ism for that matter)?
I would answer you would do this thing you are doing again... eh... kurwa...
Sometimes your answers are genius sometimes writing answers to thing that shouldn't be answered proves you are dumb too (yes,according to me & my opinion)
Your answer was unnecessary. My answer was for u/axolotl_peyotl rather.
QUESTION, noun. [Latin quaestio. See Quest.] - "to seek". If one represents choice within balance (need/want); then to seek implies want over need aka ignorance over adherence to self sustenance.
Does nature suggest questions to your perception and does nature require you to proclaim answers? What if the value of all questionable and answerable resides within balance; and our responding choice represents the evaluation thereof?
What if you don't need to proclaim value; only adapt to ongoing value by temporary choice of evaluation. Did you need to prove me dumb or did you choose between wanting and not wanting to prove me dumb?
What if I didn't responded to a suggested question; but to perceived inspiration for the sustenance of self?
Adaptation to perceived inspiration for growth of comprehension.