Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

21
Unthinking Adherence - the religion of Scientism (media.scored.co)
posted 2 years ago by Graphenium 2 years ago by Graphenium +22 / -1
14 comments share
14 comments share save hide report block hide replies
Comments (14)
sorted by:
▲ 4 ▼
– DZP1 4 points 2 years ago +4 / -0

This is unfortunate, and scientism is flawed. Perhaps as dogmatic as religions based on supernatural things.

Consider this: let us say that current science may have incomplete models, and making judgements based on that can be wrong. For example, if the universe actually has more dimensions than just three, and we can only see three but there might be things in existence in higher dimensions we cannot perceive, then the concept of gods on a higher plane becomes more believable. Maybe we just can't see them, and maybe we are so far below them we don't get much attention from them.

I think it was Godel who identified that some logic systems cannot tell from within whether all their beliefs are true or have flaws. So scientism may be inherently limited.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– Graphenium [S] 0 points 2 years ago +2 / -2

Excellent response man you touch on a ton of really interesting stuff related to this idea!

In the first place, you’re absolutely right, it’s as if our overconfidence in our own knowledge, or our hubris even, leads us to “ruling out” things which cannot justifiably be ruled out when given an honest accounting.

It seems in regards to the fields of science, this is mostly based on the assumptions or even beliefs of the scientists who make up that field. And if anything has been shown time and time again, it’s that when you assume, one tends to make an ass of everything.

I see this whole subject as echoing Kuhn’s ”Paradigm Shift” perspective, where entrenched beliefs and the paradigms built on these beliefs actively resist the shift towards greater truth, when it threatens their foundational beliefs structure.

Likewise, your point about Gödel’s ”Incompleteness Theorem” is spot-on. Not only did he prove that some logical systems are incomplete, but actually that ALL symbolic logical systems (i.e. “math”/“language”/“code”) are INHERENTLY incomplete. Where “incompleteness” seems quite complicated, but it basically means “no logical system is capable of actually proving itself correct” - which has insane repercussions on things like math in general, which is inherently based on making assumptions (axioms) which mathematicians all regard as “proven”, but which ultimately are totally undermined by Gödel’s work. It’s a mind blowing thing to try and wrap your head around, and directly relavent to this subject, so thanks for raising it!

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– DZP1 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

The implications of quantum mechanics suggesting that there are many parallel universes implies there may be other dimensions, and somehow our space shares existence distributed among them. This has implications for the 'supernatural' which may be a case of a larger universe than we can see. That opens up so many cans of worms, but also that we may have a more enlightened future. In fact, guaranteed more enlightened, as we know right now that our current paradigms have holes, unknown areas. Obviously that means we have discoveries to make that may change our current models. Thus being too dogmatic is an error; theories can be overturned and certainly that does happen.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ -1 ▼
– Graphenium [S] -1 points 2 years ago +1 / -2

So many open questions, some that come to mind:

  1. the “problem” of consciousness (aka the source and mechanism)

  2. the observer “problem” of quantum mechanics

  3. the “dark matter” “problem”

  4. the “dark energy”/“zero-point energy” “problem”

  5. hell, going on 100 years now and we still don’t have a scale-invariant theory of the universe (quantum and macro systems don’t reconcile)

(Edit) 6) the finely tuned universe “problem” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe

The fact that people are so confident in their error is the worst part. “Safe and effective” - until their priests educate them otherwise

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Graphenium [S] 2 points 2 years ago +3 / -1

Here is an interesting, short (18m) video on the subject of Scientism, especially how its dogmatic approach often constricts the ability of honest people using science as a tool to pursue truth:

The Science Delusion - Rupert Sheldrake

permalink save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– Graphenium [S] 3 points 2 years ago +4 / -1

The video is based on a book, divided into 10 chapters, each dedicated to a question which Sheldrake feels has been neglected by the scientific establishment because of dogmatic beliefs which undergird this “religion of Scientism”.

He provides the “standard” (mainstream, cutting-edge scientific) answer to each. But then to each question, he shows study after study which demonstrate there is effectively no way the “standard” answer is correct, sufficient, or in many cases even pointing in the right direction.

Here are the chapter titles, if any of them pique your interest I recommend finding a copy of the book, you likely won’t be disappointed:

  1. Is Nature Mechanical?

  2. Is the Total Amount of Matter and Energy Always the Same?

  3. Are the Laws of Nature Fixed?

  4. Is Matter Unconscious?

  5. Is Nature Purposeless?

  6. Is All Biological Inheritance Material?

  7. Are Memories Stored as Material Traces?

  8. Are Minds Confined to Brains?

  9. Are Psychic Phenomena Illusory?

  10. Is Mechanistic Medicine the Only Kind that Really Works?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– deleted 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0
▲ 0 ▼
– Graphenium [S] 0 points 2 years ago +2 / -2

I had it bookmarked on ZLib until their domains got blasted, haven’t had a chance to hunt for it again yet!

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– TTComix 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

Thanks to everyone for this post.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– ApparentlyImAHeretic 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

literally

thou shall not suffer the heretic

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– DOI56 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

It's the worship of man's reason over God's design (example: the idea of growing children in pods rather than in the womb).

"Charles A. Lindbergh "grew up as a disciple of science. I know its fascination. I have felt the godlike power man derives from his machines." But in the last decade Charles Lindbergh has "seen the science I worshiped, and the aircraft I loved, destroying the civilization I expected them to serve . . . We are in the grip of a scientific materialism, caught in a vicious cycle where our security today seems to depend on regimentation and weapons which will ruin us tomorrow...

Unless science is controlled by a greater moral force, it will become the Antichrist prophesied by the early Christians."

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– DOI56 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

This is also what the book of Enoch describes before the flood/cataclysm, fallen principalities teach men how to make high tech they aren't prepared for, weapons of war, cutting of roots (psychedelics), and it seems to be happening all over again. A dramatic boost in high tech to the point of rapid destruction.

Real demons are likely working with the hermetic-kabbalists through theurgic ritual, the people behind CERN and this Covid issue at the top, the types no one ever see in public.

AI can also be seen as a representation of a fallen principality, to the degree one day an actual spiritual entity might take it over. It's almost like demons are asking people to help make it for them to then take over the world for the return of Satan/Prometheus/Horus/antichrist, offering these dark priests immortality through the technological system they are trying to build (the singularity, being able to upload their consciousness to the cloud where they believe they will never die, just keep uploading to new bodies when one wears out).

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– deleted 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0
▲ 2 ▼
– Onedude123 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

Its a retry of the Cult of Reason formed during the French Revolution.

permalink save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - j6rsh (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy