Thanks. I was wondering where "Any claim that cannot satisfy all three of its conditions -- logical validity, mathematical coherence, and empirical anchoring" put the resurrection of Christ.
However, as you pointed out, I was making a serious category error. There's a reason theology was called Queen of the Sciences. Physics, Philosophy, and History are part of her court, and cannot survive without her.
We aren't there yet, but at some point I'm going to beg you to slow down so my reading can catch up. You should ignore my request, because it isn't reasonable, of course.
I will be interested to read this one, after I finish the evolution works. I completely agree with the legs of logical validity and mathematical coherence. I also want to agree with empirical verification, but I wonder what the outlines of that are -- I'm sure the book will explain.
If I take the case of the epicycles added to Ptolemy's Solar System, their math is correct and coherent. I think that the formulas are still used today for certain things, even though that model has been confirmed to not conform to reality.
Do the epicycles fail because of empiricism? They were empirical inasmuch as they were added to conform the model to observations. Because we were trapped on Earth, it was not possible to confirm their invalidity through observations from an alternative viewpoint, which we can do now.
Do the epicycles fail because of logic? They make multiple unnecessary assumptions, when compared to Copernicus' model. This runs against Ockham's Razor, though I'm ignorant of whether that is really a formal logical rule, rather than a guideline.
A badly-needed, well-organized diagnosis of what’s wrong with our civilization. Let’s hope Veriphysics becomes at least as widely-read as harmful material like the Communist Manifesto, and by the right people.
From what ive read on vox populi the words fill me with excitement and hope. Hope that the words spread. The hope that the evil we see is squashed like a bug in our life times.
"...the classical and Christian inheritance, was outmaneuvered not by better arguments but by superior rhetoric, institutional capture, and the patient infiltration of universities, academies, and publishing houses over generations."
Those J's really are thorough, I'll give them that.
Under the concise motto of "we see through a glass, darkly", Veriphysics applies to natural philosophy what mathematicians have known since Gödel's incompleteness theorems: that under any finite system of axioms there are always truths that can not be formally proven.
This philosophical manifesto details how and why Scholasticism got usurped by the Enlightenment, as well as the core failures of the latter. Moreover, it looks to the future and describes a way forward, based on three pillars: logical validity, mathematical coherence, and empirical anchoring.
It constitutes a call to reflection, and then to action.
Vox, are you going to address the Reformation in your Veriphysics book?
No, it's not relevant. It's about philosophy, not religion, theology, or Church history.
Thanks. I was wondering where "Any claim that cannot satisfy all three of its conditions -- logical validity, mathematical coherence, and empirical anchoring" put the resurrection of Christ.
Think it through. And is it knowledge or faith?
Both!
However, as you pointed out, I was making a serious category error. There's a reason theology was called Queen of the Sciences. Physics, Philosophy, and History are part of her court, and cannot survive without her.
We aren't there yet, but at some point I'm going to beg you to slow down so my reading can catch up. You should ignore my request, because it isn't reasonable, of course.
I will be interested to read this one, after I finish the evolution works. I completely agree with the legs of logical validity and mathematical coherence. I also want to agree with empirical verification, but I wonder what the outlines of that are -- I'm sure the book will explain.
If I take the case of the epicycles added to Ptolemy's Solar System, their math is correct and coherent. I think that the formulas are still used today for certain things, even though that model has been confirmed to not conform to reality.
Do the epicycles fail because of empiricism? They were empirical inasmuch as they were added to conform the model to observations. Because we were trapped on Earth, it was not possible to confirm their invalidity through observations from an alternative viewpoint, which we can do now.
Do the epicycles fail because of logic? They make multiple unnecessary assumptions, when compared to Copernicus' model. This runs against Ockham's Razor, though I'm ignorant of whether that is really a formal logical rule, rather than a guideline.
Sorry, he will likely speed up. He's harnessed the power of a new tool. Augmented high intelligence is unstoppable.
Ricardo, Darwin, now "The Enlightenment." Death rides the pale horse.
The velocity Vox is gaining is required for cutting off the heads of a hydra. Don't give it time to regenerate.
A badly-needed, well-organized diagnosis of what’s wrong with our civilization. Let’s hope Veriphysics becomes at least as widely-read as harmful material like the Communist Manifesto, and by the right people.
... And it is only February.
It can not be unnoticed that there is a lot of Gamma in those values.
Reason - The enlightened atheist springs to mind.
Fact-value distinction - And this is the argument made after doing Gamma things.
The rest have the self-centered Gamma hubris as well.
Should be required reading in school. And I suspect it one day will.
Love the cover!
ChristoReformationChads now's our time
From what ive read on vox populi the words fill me with excitement and hope. Hope that the words spread. The hope that the evil we see is squashed like a bug in our life times.
"...the classical and Christian inheritance, was outmaneuvered not by better arguments but by superior rhetoric, institutional capture, and the patient infiltration of universities, academies, and publishing houses over generations."
Those J's really are thorough, I'll give them that.
What do you have in mind as the connection between the trifecta of logic-math-empirical ground and aletheia?
Short, poignant, rousing. Read it!
Under the concise motto of "we see through a glass, darkly", Veriphysics applies to natural philosophy what mathematicians have known since Gödel's incompleteness theorems: that under any finite system of axioms there are always truths that can not be formally proven.
This philosophical manifesto details how and why Scholasticism got usurped by the Enlightenment, as well as the core failures of the latter. Moreover, it looks to the future and describes a way forward, based on three pillars: logical validity, mathematical coherence, and empirical anchoring.
It constitutes a call to reflection, and then to action.
Picking this, for sure.
Thrilled to read it, thank you Vox
Thank you!
I had already hoped you'd compile it into a book.