Let's talk about the soul.
Options
Comments
-
people that believe in ? say our mere existence is also enough proof that ? exists, you are doing the exact same thing religious people do
Not quite ---
Abiogenesis is, again, the process of how carbon-based life sprang from non-living, carbon-based compounds.
The fact that certain things are living when at one point, there were no living things is proof of that ---
It's logical.
When theists speak of existence being proof of ? , there's nothing to lead us there. Their claims
Cannot be substantiated ---
It's illogical.abiogenesis may not be a super natural explanation but it's still an unproveabe, untestable, unobservable explanation
It is testable.. That's why there's a scientific study of it.I like how you ignored and cherry picked the words you wanted out of the definitions i gave wisdom is not just having knowledge you clearly disreguarded the rest of the definition because it runs contrary to your faulty understanding of the differences between science and wisdom.
I didn't cherry pick anything. I just bolded the important words,
Which were: experience, knowledge and good judgment.their is often no totally objective truth in science so depending on the science their is no truth.
Science is all about discovering objective truths. -
NO IT'S NOT BECAUSE to begin with the scientific method was created in the west
So what?simply gaining knowledge is not scientific you can gain knowledge about anything that does mean you did so scientifically
I'm not sure what your point is here or how it relates to mine.
I'm not saying science is THE alpha and omega of human wisdom. I'm saying that it is a form of human wisdom and that belief per se is not wisdom at all.
you said that science was the manisfestation of the wisdom of humanity but science was created in the west therefore therefore it does not encompass all of human wisdom.
science is an objective logical method of attaining knowledge wisdom is in essence a judgement of action or of thinking we judge and action as being wise or not. -
all science does is gather information and try to prove reality as much as possible it creates knowledge but wisdom is a judgement on how we use that knowledge.
-
NO IT'S NOT BECAUSE to begin with the scientific method was created in the west
So what?simply gaining knowledge is not scientific you can gain knowledge about anything that does mean you did so scientifically
I'm not sure what your point is here or how it relates to mine.
I'm not saying science is THE alpha and omega of human wisdom. I'm saying that it is a form of human wisdom and that belief per se is not wisdom at all.
you said that science was the manisfestation of the wisdom of humanity but science was created in the west therefore therefore it does not encompass all of human wisdom.
science is an objective logical method of attaining knowledge wisdom is in essence a judgement of action or of thinking we judge and action as being wise or not.
It doesn't matter where it was created.
It was created by humans
thus it is a manifestation of human wisdom. -
science [gathers] information and [explains] reality as much as possible.
Right. Like I said, its all about discovering objective truths.. Like e = mc²
-
right that's what science is in broad terms but wisdom is a judgement with what you do with the knowledge you gather also science has a particular way it comes to it's "objective truths". -
NO IT'S NOT BECAUSE to begin with the scientific method was created in the west
So what?simply gaining knowledge is not scientific you can gain knowledge about anything that does mean you did so scientifically
I'm not sure what your point is here or how it relates to mine.
I'm not saying science is THE alpha and omega of human wisdom. I'm saying that it is a form of human wisdom and that belief per se is not wisdom at all.
you said that science was the manisfestation of the wisdom of humanity but science was created in the west therefore therefore it does not encompass all of human wisdom.
science is an objective logical method of attaining knowledge wisdom is in essence a judgement of action or of thinking we judge and action as being wise or not.
It doesn't matter where it was created.
It was created by humans
thus it is a manifestation of human wisdom.
maybe i'm just being picky but that is not exactly what you said you said science was the manifestation of the wisdom of humanity. Which would mean that all human socities had a hand in creating the scientific method but that is not so -
people that believe in ? say our mere existence is also enough proof that ? exists, you are doing the exact same thing religious people do
Not quite ---
Abiogenesis is, again, the process of how carbon-based life sprang from non-living, carbon-based compounds.
The fact that certain things are living when at one point, there were no living things is proof of that ---
It's logical.
When theists speak of existence being proof of ? , there's nothing to lead us there. Their claims
Cannot be substantiated ---
It's illogical.abiogenesis may not be a super natural explanation but it's still an unproveabe, untestable, unobservable explanation
It is testable.. That's why there's a scientific study of it.I like how you ignored and cherry picked the words you wanted out of the definitions i gave wisdom is not just having knowledge you clearly disreguarded the rest of the definition because it runs contrary to your faulty understanding of the differences between science and wisdom.
I didn't cherry pick anything. I just bolded the important words,
Which were: experience, knowledge and good judgment.their is often no totally objective truth in science so depending on the science their is no truth.
Science is all about discovering objective truths.
abiogenesis is equally unsubstantiated, it's not testable because it has never happened we have no proof that it has ever happened and if we reproduce it in a lab that still won't be proof because that required intelligent intervention.
In totality the theory of abiogenesis is not just life coming from non-life it's life coming from non-life naturally scientist are trying to create it then study it you cannot study a phenomena that does not first exist and our being here is not proof that we came here through abiogenesis.
i said OFTEN there is no objective truth in science because at a certain levels in certain sciences conclusions are created by interpretation of gathered information AND real truth is not up for interpertation -
right that's what science is in broad terms but wisdom is a judgement with what you do with the knowledge you gather also science has a particular way it comes to it's "objective truths".
Wisdom is not a judgment.Oxford English Dictionary wrote:wis·dom
noun
the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.
It's a quality of,
1. good judgment (but also)
2. experience (and)
3. knowledge
By quality, that means wisdom is a "distinctive attribute" of something.
That something can include a method of attaining knowledge.maybe i'm just being picky but that is not exactly what you said you said science was the manifestation of the wisdom of humanity. Which would mean that all human socities had a hand in creating the scientific method but that is not so
I didn't say the manifestation of human wisdom; I said a manifestation of human wisdom,
meaning there isn't one, and only one, manifestation of human wisdom ---
but many. The scientific method is one, but not the one.abiogenesis is equally unsubstantiated, it's not testable because it has never happened we have no proof that it has ever happened and if we reproduce it in a lab that still won't be proof because that required intelligent intervention.
In totality the theory of abiogenesis is not just life coming from non-life it's life coming from non-life naturally scientist are trying to create it then study it you cannot study a phenomena that does not first exist and our being here is not proof that we came here through abiogenesis.
Life is carbon-based. Simple organic molecules
Are carbon based and sustain life ---
Fact.
Abiogenesis is all about how life sprang from those simple organic molecules.
When scientists attempt to recreate the atmosphere of early earth
To study how those molecules were able to make copies of themselves, they are investigating how abiogenesis
happened, not if it did.
We know it did.i said OFTEN there is no objective truth in science because at a certain levels in certain sciences conclusions are created by interpretation of gathered information AND real truth is not up for interpertation
You can certainly explain the meaning of objective truth, which is what interpretation is...
Unless I'm missing something.
Scientific interpretation isOxford English Dictionary wrote:The action of explaining the meaning of something:
‘the interpretation of data’
Artistic interpretation is different. It isOxford English Dictionary wrote:A stylistic representation of a creative work or dramatic role:
‘two differing interpretations, both bearing the distinctive hallmarks of each writer’s perspective’ -
right that's what science is in broad terms but wisdom is a judgement with what you do with the knowledge you gather also science has a particular way it comes to it's "objective truths".
Wisdom is not a judgment.Oxford English Dictionary wrote:wis·dom
noun
the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.
It's a quality of,
1. good judgment (but also)
2. experience (and)
3. knowledge
By quality, that means wisdom is a "distinctive attribute" of something.
That something can include a method of attaining knowledge.maybe i'm just being picky but that is not exactly what you said you said science was the manifestation of the wisdom of humanity. Which would mean that all human socities had a hand in creating the scientific method but that is not so
I didn't say the manifestation of human wisdom; I said a manifestation of human wisdom,
meaning there isn't one, and only one, manifestation of human wisdom ---
but many. The scientific method is one, but not the one.abiogenesis is equally unsubstantiated, it's not testable because it has never happened we have no proof that it has ever happened and if we reproduce it in a lab that still won't be proof because that required intelligent intervention.
In totality the theory of abiogenesis is not just life coming from non-life it's life coming from non-life naturally scientist are trying to create it then study it you cannot study a phenomena that does not first exist and our being here is not proof that we came here through abiogenesis.
Life is carbon-based. Simple organic molecules
Are carbon based and sustain life ---
Fact.
Abiogenesis is all about how life sprang from those simple organic molecules.
When scientists attempt to recreate the atmosphere of early earth
To study how those molecules were able to make copies of themselves, they are investigating how abiogenesis
happened, not if it did.
We know it did.i said OFTEN there is no objective truth in science because at a certain levels in certain sciences conclusions are created by interpretation of gathered information AND real truth is not up for interpertation
You can certainly explain the meaning of objective truth, which is what interpretation is...
Unless I'm missing something.
Scientific interpretation isOxford English Dictionary wrote:The action of explaining the meaning of something:
‘the interpretation of data’
Artistic interpretation is different. It isOxford English Dictionary wrote:A stylistic representation of a creative work or dramatic role:
‘two differing interpretations, both bearing the distinctive hallmarks of each writer’s perspective’
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place and that is the problem that makes abiogenesis basically impossible because it starts off from a weak footing to begin with because there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
yeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are. -
From what Ive read. A person's soul is their personality. For example when a person says they are happy or sad, that is an expression of the soul. Your spirit is basically your life force or the true self. The energy contained within a house of flesh. The lower path is when someone is controlled by the flesh, while the higher path is when the spirit leads the body. Your spirit is also your link to the creator or what some would call the ? within.
-
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
Wisdom is a quality.
Experience, knowledge, and good judgment constitute wisdom.
Without those things, it isn't wisdom
According to the definition you and I agree on.
Its not as subjective as you're trying to make it.abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place
If abiogenesis does not start with simple organic compounds,
Where does it start?
Molecules are non-living things.
Abiogenesis is the process by which life arose from those non-living molecules,
Not how non-living molecules came into existence.there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
An organic compound is any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compoundyeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are.
---Like I said, its all about discovering objective truths.. Like e = mc²
---Right -
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
Wisdom is a quality.
Experience, knowledge, and good judgment constitute wisdom.
Without those things, it isn't wisdom
According to the definition you and I agree on.
Its not as subjective as you're trying to make it.abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place
If abiogenesis does not start with simple organic compounds,
Where does it start?
Molecules are non-living things.
Abiogenesis is the process by which life arose from those non-living molecules,
Not how non-living molecules came into existence.there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
An organic compound is any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compoundyeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are.
---Like I said, its all about discovering objective truths.. Like e = mc²
---Right
We didn't agree on definition you sliced up the raw definition I gave and ignored the more indepth explanation I gave of the concept. You are ignoring what you don't like. abiogensis is a theory it doesn't exist, meaning that we have no proof it actually happened but you talk as if it's fact but it is not
wikipepia also says
"The distinction between organic and inorganic carbon compounds, while "useful in organizing the vast subject of chemistry... is somewhat arbitrary" AND "There is no single "official" definition of an organic compound." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound once again you just cherry picked what you wanted
BEFORE THE EXTREME improbablity OF ABIOGENESIS would have hypothetically happened there must first be the correct coming together of inorganic compounds unfortunately that presents a problem because the odds of inorganic compound just coming together and springing organic compounds into existence by chance is beyond astrometrical -
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
Wisdom is a quality.
Experience, knowledge, and good judgment constitute wisdom.
Without those things, it isn't wisdom
According to the definition you and I agree on.
Its not as subjective as you're trying to make it.abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place
If abiogenesis does not start with simple organic compounds,
Where does it start?
Molecules are non-living things.
Abiogenesis is the process by which life arose from those non-living molecules,
Not how non-living molecules came into existence.there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
An organic compound is any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compoundyeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are.
---Like I said, its all about discovering objective truths.. Like e = mc²
---Right
We didn't agree on definition you sliced up the raw definition I gave and ignored the more indepth explanation I gave of the concept.
You are ignoring what you don't like.abiogensis is a theory it doesn't exist, we have no proof it exists.
The following quote is how you originally defined it.
I followed the first definition
Because it seemed more relevant
But if you'd like, we can follow the second and/or third and it would still be applicable To science, the third being even more so.wis·dom
1)the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.
2)the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment. 3) the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.
sci·ence
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. -
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
Wisdom is a quality.
Experience, knowledge, and good judgment constitute wisdom.
Without those things, it isn't wisdom
According to the definition you and I agree on.
Its not as subjective as you're trying to make it.abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place
If abiogenesis does not start with simple organic compounds,
Where does it start?
Molecules are non-living things.
Abiogenesis is the process by which life arose from those non-living molecules,
Not how non-living molecules came into existence.there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
An organic compound is any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compoundyeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are.
---Like I said, its all about discovering objective truths.. Like e = mc²
---Right
We didn't agree on definition you sliced up the raw definition I gave and ignored the more indepth explanation I gave of the concept.
You are ignoring what you don't like.abiogensis is a theory it doesn't exist, we have no proof it exists.
The following quote is how you originally defined it.
I followed the first definition
Because it seemed more relevant
But if you'd like, we can follow the second and/or third and it would still be applicable To science, the third being even more so.wis·dom
1)the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.
2)the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment. 3) the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.
sci·ence
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
i gave a simple dictionary definition but gave more depth understanding to the meaning, there is a reason why we have dictionaries and encyclopedias. dictionaries don't give a real understanding of the concepts behind words.
wisdom is a judgement , science is a system by which we attain knowledge but wisdom is how we use whatever knowledge we have and how we attain this knowledge does not have to be scientific -
wikipepia also says
"The distinction between organic and inorganic carbon compounds, while "useful in organizing the vast subject of chemistry... is somewhat arbitrary" AND "There is no single "official" definition of an organic compound." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound once again you just cherry picked what you wanted
All that means is that there is no official definition
But that does not mean that organic compounds cannot be defined
Or that they are somehow mythological or nonexistent. And it certainly does not
Mean that abiogenesis is impossible.the odds of inorganic compound just coming together and springing organic compounds into existence by chance is beyond astrometrical
That must be why the Miller-Urey experiment proved that it can happen.i gave a simple dictionary definition but gave more depth understanding to the meaning, there is a reason why we have dictionaries and encyclopedias. dictionaries don't give a real understanding of the concepts behind words.
You gave no in-depth understanding of wisdom,
Just the Oxford definition --- which is all we really needed: the exact meaning of the word.
I'm not here to argue the validity of the Oxford dictionary. There's not enough time
In the world for that. Yet, if we take the definitions of words at face value as you originally would have done
Had I not countered your argument, you will have to respond to this
Without throwing the entire dictionary out with the bathwater:If wisdom is the quality of having experience, knowledge and good judgment, then observation and experiment of the scientific method provides that.
You don't gain knowledge and experience until you observe and experiment. In fact,
experience and experiment share the same etymology: "experiri" is to "try". Experience is defined as observation. Observation is defined as gaining information, i.e. knowledge.
Experimentation is good judgment in practice. -
wikipepia also says
"The distinction between organic and inorganic carbon compounds, while "useful in organizing the vast subject of chemistry... is somewhat arbitrary" AND "There is no single "official" definition of an organic compound." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound once again you just cherry picked what you wanted
All that means is that there is no official definition
But that does not mean that organic compounds cannot be defined
Or that they are somehow mythological or nonexistent. And it certainly does not
Mean that abiogenesis is impossible.the odds of inorganic compound just coming together and springing organic compounds into existence by chance is beyond astrometrical
That must be why the Miller-Urey experiment proved that it can happen.i gave a simple dictionary definition but gave more depth understanding to the meaning, there is a reason why we have dictionaries and encyclopedias. dictionaries don't give a real understanding of the concepts behind words.
You gave no in-depth understanding of wisdom,
Just the Oxford definition --- which is all we really needed: the exact meaning of the word.
I'm not here to argue the validity of the Oxford dictionary. There's not enough time
In the world for that. Yet, if we take the definitions of words at face value as you originally would have done
Had I not countered your argument, you will have to respond to this
Without throwing the entire dictionary out with the bathwater:If wisdom is the quality of having experience, knowledge and good judgment, then observation and experiment of the scientific method provides that.
You don't gain knowledge and experience until you observe and experiment. In fact,
experience and experiment share the same etymology: "experiri" is to "try". Experience is defined as observation. Observation is defined as gaining information, i.e. knowledge.
Experimentation is good judgment in practice.
if something has no definition then it cannot be scientifically defined and you can pull it's meaning and scope out of your ass. As a proof for abiogenesis The miller-urey experiment failed, all it did was produce molecules, amino acids not living cells and in any case that would not be the natural abiogenesis that we are talking about because it would be a result of the intelligent design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezvGnLfovF4
i did give a greater understanding of what wisdom is you just continue to ignore what you don't like about the concept and even in the ]\dictionary definition i gave it says "the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; like i've been trying to tell you what is wise depends on the judgement of people after the fact what wisdom is is dependent on the "AND GOOD JUDGEMENT" .
it's not just attaining knowledge , science is a method for that. -
It has been defined. It has no
Official definition, which is different from
Being completely undefined and/or
Unknown.
The Miller-Urey experiment
Demonstrated that organic compounds
Could arise from inorganic progenitors,
Which is what you were just saying
Was "astrometrical"
If you read the full definition, it says
THE QUALITY OF
having
Experience, knowledge and good judgment.
It doesn't say that wisdom is a judgment
In and of itself.
Rather, its a quality, or in other words,
An attribute or characteristic
Of; it's HAVING experience, knowledge
And good judgment.
So wisdom is someone (or something)
That HAS (or exudes)
Those things ---
It's painfully clear you have
No understanding of
1. How dictionaries work
2. Abiogenesis
3. How sentences are constructed in English.
I mean no offense by that.
But we can't have a proper discussion
When you're just throwing straws
Out there.
I'll end it here, because like I
Told AJackson, I don't plan on being
Here long ---
There's nothing to gain but a headache. -
It has been defined. It has no
Official definition, which is different from
Being completely undefined and/or
Unknown.
The Miller-Urey experiment
Demonstrated that organic compounds
Could arise from inorganic progenitors,
Which is what you were just saying
Was "astrometrical"
If you read the full definition, it says
THE QUALITY OF
having
Experience, knowledge and good judgment.
It doesn't say that wisdom is a judgment
In and of itself.
Rather, its a quality, or in other words,
An attribute or characteristic
Of; it's HAVING experience, knowledge
And good judgment.
So wisdom is someone (or something)
That HAS (or exudes)
Those things ---
It's painfully clear you have
No understanding of
1. How dictionaries work
2. Abiogenesis
3. How sentences are constructed in English.
I mean no offense by that.
But we can't have a proper discussion
When you're just throwing straws
Out there.
I'll end it here, because like I
Told AJackson, I don't plan on being
Here long ---
There's nothing to gain but a headache.
what is painfully clear to me is you just ignore what you don't like or what runs contrary to your opinion.
and like i keep saying a dictionary is not the place to go if you want to understand the concept behind a word . the odds of abiogenesis happening according to what you called natural processes are astrometical and the miller-uray experiment only proved that amino acids can be created under selected and carefully created conditions and to make it worse there is no proof that the environmental conditions of the experiment were present on early earth.
wisdom is judgement anyway you want to slice it because if wisdom is the quality of having good judgement as you say then WHO decides what is GOOD ABOUT THE JUDGEMENT??? PEOPLE. It could be the individual or the society but it still comes back to someone deciding.
if there is no official definition then there is no real definition. -
a dictionary is not the place to go if you want to understand the concept behind a word.
I'm pretty sure the bolded is what definitions are.astrometical
Maybe you should
Consult a dictionary to get the concept
Behind this word before you use it
Againwisdom is judgement anyway you want to slice it because if wisdom is the quality of having good judgement as you say then WHO decides what is GOOD ABOUT THE JUDGEMENT??? PEOPLE.
Not really. If you decide to drink bleach,
Does society at large get to hold a debate
As to whether your choice was wise or not?
No.
It wasn't wise based off the facts of reality.
So your decision would be inherently
Unwise. Like the definition says,
Wisdom is a quality, or attribute, of a thing. -
if there is no official definition then there is no real definition.
There are no official definitions of lots of words;
Here's an example:
There is no official definition of recession, but there is general recognition that the term refers to a period of decline in economic activity.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2009/03/basics.htm
That doesn't mean that we don't
Understand what
The word refers to.there is no proof that the environmental conditions of the experiment were present on early earth.
There have been variants
And improvements to the original experiment,
and recent research suggests that
Early Earth's atmosphere was even more favorable
Than what was previously thought.
-
if there is no official definition then there is no real definition.
There are no official definitions of lots of words;
Here's an example:
There is no official definition of recession, but there is general recognition that the term refers to a period of decline in economic activity.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2009/03/basics.htm
That doesn't mean that we don't
Understand what
The word refers to.there is no proof that the environmental conditions of the experiment were present on early earth.
There have been variants
And improvements to the original experiment,
and recent research suggests that
Early Earth's atmosphere was even more favorable
Than what was previously thought.
In a hard science there must be a hard definition a soft science like economics can use unclear concepts that are open to interpretation. But sciences like physics and chemistry??? no that's not going to cut it if they actually want to prove something.
absolutely none of those experiments actually prove abiogensis happened in the past or can happen now
What we have here is the creation of organic compounds in a controlled lab environment vs the random creation of these compounds by natural processes the latter is much much harder to prove -
People have to understand that some scientist are actually just pulling ? out of there ass not all of them but some on them
-
a dictionary is not the place to go if you want to understand the concept behind a word.
I'm pretty sure the bolded is what definitions are.astrometical
Maybe you should
Consult a dictionary to get the concept
Behind this word before you use it
Againwisdom is judgement anyway you want to slice it because if wisdom is the quality of having good judgement as you say then WHO decides what is GOOD ABOUT THE JUDGEMENT??? PEOPLE.
Not really. If you decide to drink bleach,
Does society at large get to hold a debate
As to whether your choice was wise or not?
No.
It wasn't wise based off the facts of reality.
So your decision would be inherently
Unwise. Like the definition says,
Wisdom is a quality, or attribute, of a thing.
well you are pretty much wrong a dictionary just gives the meaning of words with no depth analysis on the concept the word represents.
the bold is just opinion perhaps drinking bleach would be the wise option depending on the circumstances and the only way to decide if an action is wise or not is to filter it through a human brain in other words someone has to judge my action or reasoning to be wise or not -
In a hard science there must be a hard definition a soft science like economics can use unclear concepts that are open to interpretation. But sciences like physics and chemistry??? no that's not going to cut it if they actually want to prove something.
There is no official
Definition of hard or soft science so
What are you referring to?
The fact that definitions don't work the way
You want them to doesn't
Make your arguments better.absolutely none of those experiments actually prove abiogensis happened in the past or can happen now
Like I said
Before, scientists aren't trying to
Prove whether or not
Abiogenesis
Happened --- They're investigating
How it happened.What we have here is the creation of organic compounds in a controlled lab environment vs the random creation of these compounds by natural processes the latter is much much harder to prove
In the lab,
They arise naturally.
So..What we have here is the creation of these compounds by natural processes in a labthe bold is just opinion perhaps drinking bleach would be the wise option
But you wouldn't do it
Because I assume you know the consequences.
Those consequences are grounded in
Reality, not our opinions
