Quote:
Originally Posted by nguirado
It can describe, potentially, everything physical. If everything is physical, then it can potentially describe everything including why I'm posting this now.
If not, then no.
If you saw me flout a rule you feel strongly about, say clubbing a baby seal, you wouldn't get angry?
|
Hello nguirado,
you use 3 times the world everything. The first time this use is not justified except from a blind faith in science which is in contrast with the argument.
Let me expand. The word potentially, that you prep-end, apparently mitigates the rigidity of the world everything, but it is inappropriate. In my opinion it is just hopeful. I have a strong opinion about this. I do not know of a single instance in which science has been capable of describing any single episode of reality with
absolute precision. "Absolute" has the same "rigidity" of "everything".
It is my experience that whenever some non scientist, or quite often when a scientist with non scientific purposes, makes a statement about science, inadvertently or on purpose, his reasoning becomes fuzzy (from a scientific point of view)
Your reasoning has merits though, that probably might still float. To me it would be quite helpful if you recast it without making use of rigid words that when used outside a logic problem have a tendency to bring more damage then benefits.