Saturday, December 17, 2011

A Monologue in Two Acts

icestorm at frostcloud said: Sorry but I have banned you from posting/viewing in the General Philosophy and all the Science forums. Unfortunately, your posts simply derail a lot of good topic discussions.


Act I Scene I

Theist, atheist debate is still the RAGE on the PAGE. God is all things to all men. It is a fact that on entrance into the city of ROME the early CHRISTIANS were called ATHEISTS on account that their GOD was not a recognised GOD in THE PANTHEON of their city. That is SO!. The atheist is technically speaking "A FOOL" since the name means NON-THEIST or NON-THEOLOGIAN, yet they use WORDS, which is, that which is, determined from the etymological meaning as users of WORDS. By discoursing on GOD and claiming he does not exist they use the word GOD and therefore are theologians if you get my drift that is. Which leads us into the second part of this monologue which is why it is so that the majority of atheists choose not to believe in a heavenly creator. Christianity supposes unity of purpose and the atheist sees disunity of purpose in that there in a PANTHEON of Christian religions and each one claiming that theirs is the right way. No wonder he is con-fuse-ed. The very religionists who claim to be doing GODS WILL on earth are actually no better off than the A-THEIST. What a dilemma! How is that GAP bridged we ought then ask? The MOSAIC LAW is representative of those things that cause hurt and harm of which ISRAELS early HISTORY is the account. PROHIBITION of specific kinds of behaviours are summed up by one sentence "DO FOR OTHERS AS YOU WOULD LIKE THEM TO DO FOR YOU!" shouted out in BOLD TYPE is the LAW OF RECIPROCITY .

Act I Scene II

The evidence for reciprocity failure is abundant. Too dark or too light and the film does not act in accord with the f-stop rule in photography, which means that a recalculation is required dependant on the data that is in the fine print on the piece of paper sometimes hidden in the film pack, if not you can request a data sheet from the film's manufacturer. The miracle of engineering is the human eye. To think, no believe that such a fine tuned instrument was not made by a willingly involved person beggars disbelief. O.K. we are into Paley's clock argument NOW are we? An atheist will say. Then produce a straw man argument like, we are born, we live, we die based on past and present experience during their brief experience with the history of time, assert from the evidence from the fossil record that we evolved over time. Fine argument if you have all the data and the algorithm that produced such splendid diversity, if not then I suggest they think through the subject of free will again. The voluntary powers given to each of us means we have a choice. To do good work or bad work or put another way research the list of available options for the purchase of a consumer item. Who likes being sold a lemon? If you can find one person who likes a bad deal I will show you a masochist.

Act I Scene III

Health and wealth are the two enterprises that drive all in their fashions. Sorry no health, no wealth therefore health is the vital issue. Soldiers of the first world war willingly laid down life and limb on behalf of King and country and their national churches stood behind them as did the atheist. To not do so was deemed a criminal offence and many went to jail, tarred and feathered along the way for daring not to take a part in that walk to the theatre of war of slaughter hurt harm and injury to our fellow beings just because the KINGS of the EARTH took a stand to protect NATIONAL PROPERTY. So they have solved the problem of inflation, the account books are balanced, the bookkeepers are working right through the night to find the errors in the trial balance NOW are they? I think not. Case closed.

Act II Scene I

Apologies for the distillation of history into a "REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM". Who likes being sold a lemon" Lemon is figurative speech for a car that persistently breaks down. Engineers regularly test an item of manufacture to destruction. That denotes how much faith they have in their calculations. Same as the wonder of a child building a sandcastle knowing full well that the tide will come in and tomorrow no sandcastle, so before exit stage left, our actor stamps on it like Terry Gilliam's BIG FOOT descends before an episode of MONTY PYTHON'S FLYING CIRCUS. If you saw "COAST" with its presenter Neil Oliver on S.B.S. last night you would understand what I mean. If not then what follows is what I read from it but not necessarily what others read, even the presenters probably did not notice in fact. The experiment was, take DRY sand from different beaches. You will need a bucket for each sample. Before you leave home for the beach, source the following tools. A funnel to pass the dry sand through so that the angle the sand falls to can be measured with a protractor. Etc. Etc. Etc. all the way to mixing the sand with water in the proportion of 1 water to 8 sand in each bucket. Flip bucket make sandcastles, put bucket on top, fill bucket with water till sandcastle crumbles. Repeat experiment for each sample. You now know which beach has the best sand for sandcastles. A lot of work to do it is. Seven Mile Beach has the best sand for sandcastles in the Hobart area from personal past experience.

Act II Scene II

The duty performed by experiment is to test the limits of a system, in the above case the qualities possessed of sand. Measure carefully then test to collect the empirical evidence or data set from which future projects might be initiated. We do not like being tested and being treated like crash test dummies, so, a stand in is prerequisite. Buster in MYTHBUSTERS is an ARCHETYPE. That is the scientific method in a nutshell. Hypothesis, experiment, data set, predications true/false, if true report to your peers your findings, if not true re-frame hypothesis which is what one ought do with negative feed back results, retest, true report/false reframe, retest is called a feedback loop. Simple? Science is loopy, but then the ideal car has always been a Tardis like instrument, in that with one, there is no excuse to ever be late since the possibility exists that one can be in all places at all times. Problem being forgetting where we left it, if so then who is the lemon? 10/4 powder monkey, over and out. (Reductio ad absurdum is a mode of argumentation that seeks to establish a contention by deriving an absurdity from its denial, thus arguing that a thesis must be accepted because its rejection would be untenable. It is a style of reasoning that has been employed throughout the history of mathematics and philosophy from classical antiquity onwards.)

No comments: