Reason vs. Nature...

[Xanthier]

Nature itself is contrary to reason, everything instinct tells us is exact opposite of those things we rationalize we should do, therefore how could it possibly stem from it? That's why we are not animals.

Also, laws of nature cannot be categorized by the fundamental scientific components of the universe: energy, matter, so forth.
Without gravity, a ball would not fall, and without a ball, you could not observe gravity...but if you take away the ball, do you take away gravity? no..they are not dependent. The fact is laws like gravity are independent from everything else, which is not easily explainable.

That's my opinion anyway and I know someone that has developed a whole theory on the thing if you want to know more, but it's very similar to the symbol grounding problem having to do with computers and AI

[DooMBoy]

God vs Nature

AGAIN?! If I see another thread like this, I will shoot myself in the foot and jump out the nearest and highest window.

[GS-1719]

'Laws' of nature are fractal. Enough said, thank you and good night.

[CyRaptor]

Xanthier said:

we are not animals.

Yeah we are.

[Xanthier]

Okay okay...edit: we do not always behave as animals, even in the most primitive of cultures, is what i meant to say.

[DooMBoy]

And just where does God come into all of this?

[Major Grit]

I am with Doom Boy !

[Wobbo]

Xanthier said:

Nature itself is contrary to reason, everything instinct tells us is exact opposite of those things we rationalize we should do, therefore how could it possibly stem from it? That's why we are not animals.

Also, laws of nature cannot be categorized by the fundamental scientific components of the universe: energy, matter, so forth.
Without gravity, a ball would not fall, and without a ball, you could not observe gravity...but if you take away the ball, do you take away gravity? no..they are not dependent. The fact is laws like gravity are independent from everything else, which is not easily explainable.

That's my opinion anyway and I know someone that has developed a whole theory on the thing if you want to know more, but it's very similar to the symbol grounding problem having to do with computers and AI

Dumbest thread ever. your argument is ilogical, because your applying your preconceived worldview to the facts, rather than letting facts shape reality. For example, who says we are not animals? And more importantly who decides what is an animal and what isnt? Perhaps being an animal is nothing to be ashamed of. thats just an example.

Nature cannot BY DEFINITION be illogical, because then what would be illogical would be natural! Either youre a total idiot or you have to clarify whats going on.

Name an instinct that is not compatible with logical evolutionary steps. Name one.

While its true that human understanding MAY OR MAY NOT ever develop a entire theory that can summarize every bit of phenomena ever, obviously science and logic ARE CAPABLE of understanding *SOME* fundamanetal natural truths, OR YOU WOULDNT HAVE THE COMPUTER YOUR READING THIS ON.

GS-1719, check out the book called a new kind of sceince by stephen wolfram, its excactly what the cellular automata and Neural network people have been saying about the world for years, great book.

[Fredrik]

Nature itself is contrary to reason, everything instinct tells us is exact opposite of those things we rationalize we should do, therefore how could it possibly stem from it? That's why we are not animals.

Huh? Name an example.

Also, laws of nature cannot be categorized by the fundamental scientific components of the universe: energy, matter, so forth.

Uh, yes they can. Again, you should give an example to illustrate your complete lack of understanding further.

Without gravity, a ball would not fall, and without a ball, you could not observe gravity...but if you take away the ball, do you take away gravity? no..they are not dependent. The fact is laws like gravity are independent from everything else, which is not easily explainable.

I actually don't understand what you're trying to say here. Does gravity not exist because it can't be observed if you take away the ball? That is practically impossible because you'd have to remove all matter in the universe if you wanted to get rid of gravity.

[Little Faith]

Xanthier said:

Nature itself is contrary to reason, everything instinct tells us is exact opposite of those things we rationalize we should do, therefore how could it possibly stem from it? That's why we are not animals.

I have always counted the urge to find reason as being an instinct specific to humans.

[Xanthier]

Xian said:

. For example, who says we are not animals? And more importantly who decides what is an animal and what isnt? Perhaps being an animal is nothing to be ashamed of. thats just an example.

Okay, humans are animals, I did not mean that literally humans aren't animals so perhaps there is some distinction to be made, but reason is much more complex than instinct because reason is not causal but that's a whole seperate issue...whether or not we are animals is really beside the point i was making.

Xian said:

Nature cannot BY DEFINITION be illogical, because then what would be illogical would be natural! Either youre a total idiot or you have to clarify whats going on.

I don't follow this reasoning at all, what you propose is an old fallacy dating back to Lewis CArroll's Alice and Wonderland. TO say that, "I breathe when I sleep" does that also mean..."I sleep when I breathe"?? this is hardly true and very illogical. However you are most likely right about the need to clarify. In a very limited context, whenever we give into an urge, rational thought is suspended at that time, therefore how could rational thought stemmed from such emotions...that's the idea but it's much more complex than that and that's at best a poor representation of it.

[Wobbo]

No, let me make it clearer. All physics, chemistry biology, and SCIENCE AND LOGIC IN GENERAL comes from the study of the NATURAL WORLD. YES, in fact when we "Give into urges" we are not breaking any scientific laws, in fact if anything this is further evidence that the human brain is nothing more than chemistry, prescicley because we dont always seem to have perfect free will. If i want to lose wieght but i eat cookies Because i get the sudden irresistble urge to do so, thats a result of my stomach and my nervous system, NOT a revolt against logic. (and by the way, why is it *assumed* that my goals and intended actions are logical to begin with?! Maybe im anorexic. Once again this implies that *by deafault* human rules are perfect and just and correct and for all we know the opposite might be true)

and by the way, if you say "i Breathe when i sleep" that DOES technically imply that "i sleep when i breathe" because there is a period of time when you sleep and breathe at the same time. Thats not a flaw in LOGIC thats a flaw in LANGUAGE, it might not *sound right* but its *technically correct*. Saying I sleep when i breathe doesnt mean every time i breathe i sleep, thats just the way you heard it.

If this is difficult now, imagine what would happen if we tried to have this conversation in Hebrew! Or Newspeak...

But i apologize, because this IS a good thread