Does asking "Why" disintegrate belief in reality?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Thu 11 Jun, 2009 04:00 pm
@Satan phil,
Are you saying the law of gravity didn't exist before we derived it, therefore how could it cause or have caused things to move?
Reply Thu 11 Jun, 2009 05:46 pm
'Gravity' is just one theory regarding the apparent 'movement' of 'things'.
(No 'thing' exists 'before'/unless it is perceived.)
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 02:43 am
Khethil;59264 wrote:
Of course!

When we ask any "why", we're looking to learn what the cause is/was for <whatever>. In some respects, one could almost call the two concepts synonymous.


Something is missing if we suppose why is asking for the "cause". Say, X cause Y. If X happens, then Y happens. This also suppose a constant conjunction, X&Y. Here is the problem: If one ask why Y happen, you answer with X. This person could also be very well be asking why X&Y, as oppose to X&Z, X&D.... where Y, Z, D ...are disjointed events.
Violent Meme
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 02:49 am
Asking "Why" encourages belief in-reality, more than anything else...
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 02:50 am
@Satan phil,
Satan;65605 wrote:
What is the reason for the reason?

We have to stop all explanations at some point. I prefer the empirical view that stops at the rock-bottom way-the-world-is. Evidence and rationality can only stave off ignorance for so long.

Why does an apple fall to the ground? The law of gravity.

Why is there a law of gravity? You got me. :perplexed:

In fact, even the belief that the "law" of gravity makes the apple fall rather than simply describing how it falls is a form of dogmatism. Most modern philosophers of science agree that the laws of nature aren't very much like human laws at all. The belief in supreme laws that govern the universe obviously has its roots in religion. So, it's no surprise that the many people in the highly religious West still cling to the notion of controlling laws, causes and forces.

All "why" questions are ultimately farcical. They only appear to be offering explanations but instead always point to still more "why" questions. What makes something an explanation rather than a description is purely psychological.

It is not correct tho. I read quite alot on this issue, and the generally consensus is that laws don` t just describe, but they dictate what goes on in the world. The even have a fancy name: "nomic necessity". A law of nature is N( G, F) where N is nomic, and G, and F are universals.
Violent Meme
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 02:53 am
vectorcube;73575 wrote:
A law of nature is N( G, F) where N is nomic, and G, and F are universals.

Nothing is Universal.


Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 07/18/2024 at 08:46:15