As you even admitted yourself, there is a difference between especially and necessarily. Therefore by definition accepting a claim off of scientific thinking is still a belief. A belief doesn't require accepting a claim off of nonscientific thinking, it could still be either. If you won't acknowledge this point then I'm gonna realize you're trolling. — SonJnana
Okay I will demonstrate to you why you are still holding beliefs.
A belief is accepting a claim that generally permits ignorance of evidence. No where in that definition does it say necessarily permits ignorance of evidence. Therefore accepting a claim off of scientific thinking is still by definition having a belief. — SonJnana
It is silly to advise me that belief does not necessitate non evidence, because the OP had long underlined that belief may occur in both science and non science. — ProgrammingGodJordan
Okay so you acknowledge that if you accept a claim on evidence it is by definition a belief.
Now hang on, before I read any of that, answer my question that I've asked multiple times already. This is part of my demonstration that you hold beliefs.
If you see a chair in front of you, would you make the statement there is a chair in front of me, or make the statement there is likely a chair in front of me? — SonJnana
Please see point 4 above. — ProgrammingGodJordan
If you see a chair in front of you, would you make the statement there is a chair in front of me, or make the statement there is likely a chair in front of me? — SonJnana
Especially now that your prior idea was shown to be invalid, I don't detect the relevance if your question. — ProgrammingGodJordan
Also, isn't scientism a special brand of pseudo-science? — Noble Dust
If it's so very irrelevant then the point a make after you answer the question will be easy to refute right? Or are you afraid I will prove that you hold beliefs?
If you see a chair in front of you, would you make the statement there is a chair in front of me, or make the statement there is likely a chair in front of me? — SonJnana
That query is in the same realm of your recent idea, which has been shown to be invalid. — ProgrammingGodJordan
Just answer the question and I will show you why it's relevant when you answer it. — SonJnana
Do you mean the same way I showed your recent idea (which was bundled with that query) to be false? — ProgrammingGodJordan
Oh, go on. Answer the question. You might learn something. We might learn something. — Banno
1.Right. I detect no contact between you and this reality.
1a) i.e. you are unaware of your scientistic beliefs.
2. This had long been pointed out to you in this thread.
2a) your continued refusal to acknowledge this contacts a garnering of knowledge that you are in denial. — Noble Dust
Things don't require belief, to be valid. (as long mentioned). — ProgrammingGodJordan
This is not a response to what you quoted. As has been long mentioned. — Noble Dust
If you see a chair in front of you, would you make the statement there is a chair in front of me, or make the statement there is likely a chair in front of me? — SonJnana
Do you detect that you shall demonstrate your point to be true, regardless of whatever answer I return? — ProgrammingGodJordan
Do you detect that you shall demonstrate your point to be valid, regardless of whatever answer I return? — ProgrammingGodJordan
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.