|
|
|
2 registered members (TipmyPip, izorro),
556
guests, and 2
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: What are the standards of a theory?
[Re: AlbertoT]
#110172
02/06/07 12:41
02/06/07 12:41
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,900 Bielefeld, Germany
Pappenheimer
OP
Senior Expert
|
OP
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,900
Bielefeld, Germany
|
Quote:
The point is that a lot of people feel smart, asking these kind of questions which have never had an answer and will never have heisst luft
It is not only "Heisse Luft". It is not that easy. As I experience once again with my son, it is a question every human being is asking at least once in its lifetime, because it touchs your existence, it is part of the uncertainty and vulnarability of your life. And, although there is no answer, a lot of people can't stop to ask these kind of questions.
My son says: There can't be an end of the world and there can't be an endless world, and this drives me mad!
|
|
|
Re: What are the standards of a theory?
[Re: Pappenheimer]
#110173
02/09/07 13:15
02/09/07 13:15
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
AlbertoT
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
|
Quote:
although there is no answer, a lot of people can't stop to ask these kind of questions.
It is what I meant The point is that a lot of peole cant't stop asking these kind of question because they assume that an answer does exist even if it is unknown On the contrary a lot of the "important" philosophical problems simply do not have any answer thus the question is useless However I was mainly referring to scientific theories Science made an enormous step forward when people started asking the question "How ?" instead of the question " Why ? " It is seems obvious nowadayes but it was not like that just some hundres yeras ago
|
|
|
Re: What are the standards of a theory?
[Re: AlbertoT]
#110174
02/09/07 14:07
02/09/07 14:07
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177 Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
The point is that a lot of peole cant't stop asking these kind of question because they assume that an answer does exist even if it is unknown On the contrary a lot of the "important" philosophical problems simply do not have any answer thus the question is useless
You can't state the questions are useless, especially when it's unknown wether or not answers to those questions actually exist, assumptions or not this works both ways. It's the whole point of theory. "is statement A true ( = ) ? " will definately not mean asking the question is useless when there's no (obvious) answer.
You've also got to realise that with philosophy they follow certain rules to be able to provide 'answers'. I definately agree with you to some extent though, questions like 'why is orange orange and not blue?' seem to me pretty useless indeed. I don't believe there's a real answer to those kind of questions indeed, eventhough asking the same question but then starting with 'how come' will be more useful at first sight.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|