Jump to content
Pioneer1

Knowledge vs Science

Recommended Posts

We (me and the other White racist trolls) have come to the conclusion that some of you are confusing SCIENCE with KNOWLEDGE.

Science CONTAINS knowledge, but the two are NOT the same.
(kind of like the different Pioneers who make up the composite....lol)


When you reference different facts and discoveries from ancient African cultures like Kemet and Nubia or talk about what the ancient Native Americans knew, you're not talking about science.
You're talking about their knowledge, which may have been based in whatever concept their particular culture used to arrive at those beliefs.

SCIENCE is a uniquely Western concept.
It's more than just collecting information; there are rules and methods to actual "science".
And it is indeed a religion because it is dogmatic and fairly strict in it's application.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Troy said:

@Pioneer1 (anyone) do you think the construction of the Pyramids is an example of science applied?

 

It could be. In this modern time, I would define it as science. But what if it is something more, something we have lost? What if we've gone backwards and what we now see as science is child's play? The tinkering of childish minds desiring to know the world, but have destroyed the knowledge of those who truly knew the world? What if the method by which the pyramids were built was so beyond anything we could imagine, that we can't even consider it?  What if?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you separate science from knowledge?????

 

Definition of science:  "The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."   Primitive people learned earth science (geology) through trial and error. Not all science takes place in a laboratory. Also, alchemy which the ancients practiced is a science and is not strictly western in origin.

 

The builders of the pyramids were stone masons, precursors of the ancient Fraternal Order of Free Masons, who adopted the T-square and compass as their symbol.  Both of these are scientific instruments.     

 

Some say, aliens came to earth and taught these stone masons the science necesssary  to build the pyramids .  :o

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who say that aliens came to Earth to help build the pyramids are racists.  People who will say anything to diminish the accomplishments of Black people.  OK I dont completely believe that but you know what I mean.

 

I will say that all I know about the Pyramids tells me they we have indeed forgotten something over the millennia.   What was lost, forgotten, and often destroyed goes beyond just the construction of the pyramids. What we've forgotten is our understanding of nature and how we relate to it.  We've forgotten how to relate to each other and our place place in the universe.

 

It feels like we are reinventing the wheel even when it comes to spirituality.  Today we can only hope to discover a fraction of what we knew thousands of years ago.  SO we are susceptible to believe anything that comes along.  In much the same way some in he Black community have latched on to the world of Wakanda as a source of pride...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Troy said:

People who say that aliens came to Earth to help build the pyramids are racists.  People who will say anything to diminish the accomplishments of Black people.  OK I dont completely believe that but you know what I mean.

 

I will say that all I know about the Pyramids tells me they we have indeed forgotten something over the millennia.   What was lost, forgotten, and often destroyed goes beyond just the construction of the pyramids. What we've forgotten is our understanding of nature and how we relate to it.  We've forgotten how to relate to each other and our place place in the universe.

 

It feels like we are reinventing the wheel even when it comes to spirituality.  Today we can only hope to discover a fraction of what we knew thousands of years ago.  SO we are susceptible to believe anything that comes along.  In much the same way some in he Black community have latched on to the world of Wakanda as a source of pride...

 

@Troy Yes yes and YES!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cynique said:

Maybe the aliens were black.  

 

LOL. Don't get me started. I've considered the idea that maybe we are not from here. Maybe we did a bad thing on our planet and this planet is our prison. We were put here for bad behavior, punishment. Or more specifically, we were born here after our ancestors did a bad thing on our home planet.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other astronomical structures In many parts of the world. Perhaps it was with the assistance of aliens. In which case they favored the Egyptian over all nations. It's the only of the 7 Wonders of the Ancient World. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy
 

Pioneer1 (anyone) do you think the construction of the Pyramids is an example of science applied?


No

It's an example of ancient African KNOWLEDGE, but not science....because science didn't exist when they were being constructed....lol.

Like I said, science and knowledge are different concepts.

 

 

 


Cynique

 

How can you separate science from knowledge?????

 

Because they're two separate words.
And like I said before, science CONTAINS some elements of knowledge but it's not the same.

Science involves a METHOD of doing things and collecting information.
While knowledge IS correct information (with the correct understanding ofcourse).


Even in the definition you provided:

Definition of science: "The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

Pay attention to the words "activity encompassing the systemic study".
It's not simply information that makes it science, but HOW that information was colllected and organized.

Science is a Western method of collecting and organizing information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 where, pray tell, did you get this definition: "Science is a Western method of collecting and organizing information?"

 

We can't have a reasonable conversation on this subject if this is the basis of your understanding of science.  

 

@Delano there are some pretty remarkable structures from antiquity a in the Americas as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Troy

where, pray tell, did you get this definition: "Science is a Western method of collecting and organizing information?"

We can't have a reasonable conversation on this subject if this is the basis of your understanding of science



There are many definitions but this dictionary says:

"a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws"
 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/science

 



And Wikipedia says:

"
Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge")[2][3]:58 is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

 


Basically, science...professional accepted science....is a system with specific rules and practices for how information is collected, accepted, and arranged.

Do you not agree with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking for the "Western" qualifier you keep throwing around.  Do any of your definitions use that word?

 

But more importantly none of you definitions describe how science is practiced, which is what you don't seem to know.  Look up the "scientific method."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Troy Pioneer doesn't need to know science or the scientific method to discuss science. Since he is stating his opinion not scientific  fact. Indeed most discussions here involve non expert opinions. And while you are the resident engineer Pioneer need not accept that as validation of your opinion. Unless you are making a distinction between when you are putting forth an opinion or currently accepted scientific facts. 

If your argument is convincing on its on merits without resorting to science that leaves and impression on me. That's what Jesus did in the bible. 

@Pioneer1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

It being "Western" is a given.....because it was the West that invented it and brought it to the rest of the world.

It didn't come from China, or Nigeria, or Arabia, or any Native America culture.



 


But more importantly none of you definitions describe how science is practiced, which is what you don't seem to know. Look up the "scientific method."


I already KNOW what the scientific method is.
It's what I've been telling you, science is MORE than mere knowledge and information...it's a systematic and methodical way of collecting and organizing data.

The knowledge of the ancient cultures who constructed the pyramids, built the ancient cities of the America, build the statues on Easter Island....even the giant Islamic, Persian, Ethiopian, and Chinese civilizations of the past with all of their medicine and architecture didn't use "science" to do it but their own methods of systematically arranging knowledge.

I'm not arguing the validity or invalidity of science, I'm arguing that it is NOT the same as simple "knowledge" or even technology.

For example, part of official science is RECORDING the observations of your experiments.

If you don't record the environmental conditions for what you're doing it's not an official scientific experiment and any information from it wouldn't be officially accepted as science.

But we know that much of the techonology of the past came from people who probably couldn't even read or write, let alone "record" anything they were doing while inventing.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Delano OK, ok stop jocking Pioneer :lol:   I'll try different approach.

 

@Pioneer1 how did the people who built the pyramids acquire the knowledge they needed to construct these architectural marvels?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy
 

how did the people who built the pyramids acquire the knowledge they needed to construct these architectural marvels?


I don't know.
Perhaps they experimented.....perhaps the knowledge was BESTOWED upon them from a Higher Power.
We do know a series of smaller pyramids were built in the Sudan and I believe also the Congo that seemed to led up to the Greater ones although I'm not sure if they were built before or after.

Now....lol....since I answered your question will you answer mine......

Do you or do you not agree with the definitions I provided a few posts ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Del said:

@Troy it's the equivalent of your like button. Is pioneer excluded from acknowledgement?


Like Kalexander said......

We'll give Troy 1 hour to respond and if he doesn't.....lol.....he's a WHITE RACIST TROLL!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since  self-appointed arbitrator Del had  decreed that pioneer is rendering an OPINION, and since Del's opinion does nothing to validate pioneer's opinion, which pioneer, as usual, tries to pass off as fact, using himself as an authority,  i will stand by my opinion, which remains the same.  Science is knowledge gained from trial and error, a simple process that dates back to primitive times, and is still the basis of modern scientific procedures. The word "science" is a western translation of what all cultures were doing but had their own word for it. Again, this issue is all about people putting their spin on words in an attempt to impose their opinion on others.  And that's for real.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cynique I don't take sides . If an argument is poignant I am going to say it's on the nose. That's one for the writers and the thinkers

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your definition of "poignant"? and why would that be a criteria for an argument being on the nose.  and what you describe is "taking sides".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evoking a keen sense of sadness or regret.

‘a poignant reminder of the passing of time’
 
More example sentences
Synonyms
  1. 1.1archaic Sharp or pungent in taste or smell.
    ‘the poignant scent of her powder’
Spoiler

 

Although I could make a large witticism with pungent.A bon bon of a bon mot 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

poignant:  evoking a keen sense of sadness or regret.  You sound like you are confusing poignant with pungent -  although i would agree that pioneer's sad attempts at making his points are something he should regret.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Cynique


Science is knowledge gained from trial and error, a simple process that dates back to primitive times, and is still the basis of modern scientific procedures.

 

Science is MORE than knowledge gained simply by trial and error.

 

Like I said, there is an entire regimen involved in getting knowledge through the scientific method.

For one thing, in most cases "science" starts with a hypothesis or an assumption.

 

The differences are deeper than just a mere "spin on words".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line, scientific procedure in proving something whether it be spontaneous or hypothetical is about trial and error and cause and effect, no matter how sophisticated the equipment and resources are.  IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I am not taking the side of any individual only individual comments. And a side is more akin to a position as opposed to a point. And a point infers a stand alone position, whereas as sides are more far reaching. Although I am discussing this from a more geometrical vantage, the analogy is sound or holds water.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DelYou are rarely objective about Troy; especially in his exchanges with pioneer.  i still think you use pioneer as an instrument to obliquely snipe at Troy.  And, of course, i expect you to deny this.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at my agreement, it is on a point. And it usually about definitions or terms. I won't deny your perception. However it might be informative to hear what Troy and Pioneer think. You may be projecting your general disagreement with Pioneer on to me. I take it you weren't aware of the other meaning for poignant. Interestingly I was crafting my second response when you were assuming I had used the wrong word. The odd things was I had copied both definitions but only the archaic one came up. Is this is similar to what happens to you? perhaps poignant and pungent are etymologically related.

 

Origin

Late Middle English: from Old French, literally ‘pricking’, present participle of poindre, from Latin pungere ‘to prick’.

Pronunciation

poignant

 

Origin

Late 16th century (in the sense ‘very painful or distressing’): from Latin pungent- ‘pricking’, from the verb pungere.

Pronunciation

pungent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

already knew what "poignant" meant. That's why i questioned you. I double-checked to see if i was right, and i was. i'm still puzzled as to why any definition of poignant would be a reason to side with pioneer.  I would think the word "cogent" would be a more appropriate one in the context of the discussion. Definition of cogent. 1 : having power to compel or constrain cogent forces. 2a : appealing forcibly to the mind or reason : convincing cogent evidenceb : pertinent, relevant a cogent analysis.

 

I never intrude myself in an argument between you and Troy, but lately you always run interference for pioneer, something which involved a 180  degree turn on your part.   The reason you gave for your sudden change of heart was mawkish in hindsight.  

 

 My disagreements with pioneer are nothing i have to think about; his bold assertions based on his skewed world view just invite my disagreement.  A lot has to do with the over-confidence he exudes in making his oft time far-fetched pronouncements;  there's a weird dynamic between us.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poignant is more poetic than cogent if you think about. So were you aware that they have the same root . I am not certain from your posts if you at aware of their linkage. So my usage is archaic but makes for better word play. Did you like  the logos word play. I put that in for you especially. Yes but there is no weird feeling between me an Troy. I have a high regard for him, we have eaten in each others home. And if I can be of assistance to Troy I would do so without hesitation. Even though we disagree he is more altruistic than myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DelSounds like you think of pioneer as a sad desperate figure, who deserves your stroking,  Either that, or that his strong body odor seeps through your computer screen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I have respect for Pioneer because he was the realest about his approach. While you vibe more with K2. If cats an kittens are real then they have a special place with me. Also for me the arrogance shouldn't outshine the brilliance nor the bullsnit. Not certain what I am arbritrating in your eyes. Since I am not interested in a leadership role anywhere. I encourage everyone including my children to think for themselves.

Western Science vs Eastern Knowledge

Some how Western Knowledge vs Eastern Science doesn't quite feel right. Eastern Wisdom feels better to me.

Or maybe you just like conflict because it is more entertaining

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DelSo what does all of this have to do with your choice of the word "poignant" in connection with pioneer?  if you were really neutral, you'd refrain from moderating the exchanges between pioneer and others and do what zaji does.  She simply "likes" the comments she agrees with. And why didn't you express your dissenting opinion about eastern "wisdom" as opposed to eastern "knowledge" instead of remaining quiet.  instead, you injected yourself into the discussion by telling Troy pioneer was making good points.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1, I don't have an issue with the definitions, but anyone can copy and paste something from Wikipedia, that does not mean they understand what they've copied. 

 

Now you freely admit that you have no clue how the builders of the Pyramids acquired the knowledge to construct.  Given you lack of knowledge on the subject how can you be so positive how they were not constructed? (@Delano is this the reasoning that you are defending?)

 

It is interesting that you mentioned experimenting as a possibility.  You said you understood the scientific method.  If you do then you'd also know that experimentation is part of that process. Now I'm not saying the process was called "science" 5 thousand years ago, but likely the practice was the same -- and certainly more plausible than anything else you come up with.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was being poetic and using an archaic definition for word play. If you say I should use pungent it infers that you don't know that poignant is etymologically linked and that they share  a meaning . Re Pioneer you have stated your agreement and at times disagreement with post. Others have as well . I think you dislike that I am less combative with Troy and in general . Troy is a friend and Pioneer is neither enemy nor ally.. I perceive myself as independent . However I don't think that is true for you. You also become more emotional and less logical although that's true of me as well . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DelYou have responded to none of my questions, but just continued to tell me the type of person that you are.  Something  you do, indeed, need to relate because who you say you are, is not how you come across.  

 

i read both definitions of poignant and its root word pungent.  i can only conclude that these are adjectives you choose to apply in your reacting to pioneer's statements.  Unless of course, you elect to put your intent in CONTEXT. 

 

Troy is capable of defending himself, i was merely stating how obvious it seemed to me that you suddenly embraced pioneer after you couldn't prevail in the climate change argument with Troy.  After being told numerous times by both you and Troy, i get it.  You two are actually good friends - who both think the other is a know-it-all who likes to win arguments.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...