Printable View
the re-making old drugs with new names is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Besimudo
big pharma makes billions off this. take a drug that works, improve efficiency by 0.3%, market the drug by twisting calculations and pushing it on doctors, and you're in business.
math's pretty important.
I'd like to see a bit more than random anecdotal evidence in this thread if you expect me to take what you're saying at all seriously. Thus far you've only proven that there are exceptions to the rules on a rare occassion, as well as interesting coincidences on a rare occassion.
On a rare occassion being the emphasis here.
You've proven nothing we don't already know.
Honestly I only read this thread for Unne's replies, otherwise it isn't worth my time.
And on that note, I agree with Unne.
Edit: I read a bit of his nonsensical ramblings, only around the "bell-curve" part though, you're accusing Unne of only looking at what fits the curve, yet you're only looking at what doesnt fit it.
This goes straight into my sig.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Unne
Also, Besimudo, I still don't get what the hell you're talking about.
Besi, when you can show me an example of something non cultural that mysticism does better than reasoned examination, then we'll talk. Until then, all you've got under your belt is anecdotal evidence and some confusion between nomy and logy. It might help to ditch the overblown rhetoric and try and prove with adequate evidence the things you are trying to claim are so.
[qq=Besimudo]Hence, scientific truths have less impact than mythical ones. My dilemma is when people attach mythical proportions to science. They deliberately attach emotions to a practice that should not inspire these feelings ... hence, evolution is tricky, like heliocentricity because it removes the diamon from our awareness.[/qq]
Who are you to say what shouldn't have emotional value to people? I find the truth (meaning scientific truth) to be much more "emotionally valuable" than a pretty fairy tale; not in a mythical sense, but in a sense of wonder and appreciation and excitement all the same. And it's not only emotionally valuable, but provably, demonstrably practically useful as well. Best of both worlds.
Removing the demons from our awareness is one of the best things that ever happened to mankind. Because demons do not exist. You sound as though you value ignorance, so long as it's nice, pretty ignorance.
[qq]My argument is that we need to reflect on it once in a while, if not, more often. Sure, its not logical, it is not real, but these stories are fascinating. Moreso than the excitation state of a quark or the gluons that induce attraction.[/qq]
I enjoy a good myth. Mostly as entertainment. We can learn things from myths. Things about the human beings who wrote them. They are fascinating at times, yes.
Using myths to understand the universe is different though. It's silly and wrong. Wrong meaning inaccurate. It leads to false conclusions.
[qq]Yep. I work at the School of Pharm and applied science ... this is afct we don't want you to know. But ... 75% of all drugs developed come directly from precursor molecules derived from plants. Scientists still go into the forest thieving off natives in hope of a panacea. lol[/qq]
"Derived from plants" and "thieved from natives" are not nearly equivalent. Please substantiate this claim.
I read three lines and got a brain cramp. ouch.
"Who are you to say what shouldn't have emotional value to people? I find the truth (meaning scientific truth) to be much more "emotionally valuable" than a pretty fairy tale; not in a mythical sense, but in a sense of wonder and appreciation and excitement all the same. And it's not only emotionally valuable, but provably, demonstrably practically useful as well. Best of both worlds."
As stated, Science relies on the cerebral cortex ... i.e. the thinking part of your brain.
A myth targets the reptilian brain ... Or in other words your guts.
When we hear a myth it strikes some paradoxical truth that we cannot digest with our rational mind but goes deep into the subconscious.
The point of my lecture is just that: But before I can give you more than exciting tales, we need to wake up our guts and reconsider what we take to be true.
I am the first person to defend science ... especially against its dissenters from evangelical walks of life. But, I also seek to breath some fresh ideas into the lives of what can be termed pure Baconian reasoning. Or ... the Cartesian mentality.
Many Scientists need to learn respect for our traditions rather than simply dismissing them as precision/accuracy models from a chemistry text book ... hey Dr. Unne - we have all seen that in just about any first year text.
To reiterate ... Myths do not care about whether the sun is a Hydrogen reaction - they seek to inspire the awe of Helios and describe the human condition:
The palace of the Sun was always bright and radiant, sparkling with jewels. One day a young man named Phaeton set out to reach the palace, and after a long hot journey he found himself before Apollo, the Sun god. Shielding his eyes from Apollo's brilliant rays, the youth asked, "Is it true that, although my mother is a mortal, you are indeed my father? She said this is so, but when I tell my friends that you are my father, they laugh and make fun of me." The Sun god smiled brightly and nodded. "Yes, Phaeton, you are my son, and I am pleased that you have come to visit. Ask me anything, and I promise it shall be yours."
Phaeton was very proud to learn he was truly the son of a god, and he knew right away what he wanted. "Father, let me take your place for one day. I want to command your chariot and pull the sun across the sky, as you do each day. When my friends see me high above them, they will know what I told them is true."
We know that the sun is not really about this, but in as much as humans are concerned a moral lesson is evident.
Also, if you are still confused about pharma companies, look up the meth drug trade in the 90's. It crippled America ... all thanks to profit.
Today we face MDMA, but alas, the medical profession will find more work from this paradox also. It is cyclical.
Basically, we have moved from the shaman (who cares about our welfare) to the seedy drug dealer, who cares only for profit. Look at all the children on drugs, and then we might even discuss the high rate of suicide .. thanks again to industrialism and pharmaceuticals.
Also, if you factor in indigenous people, suicide, depression, car accidents, the life expectancy for the west is not that great.
They twisted unemployment by changing the definition from unemployed to student; the government is also selective in its statistic for old age and death.
Note: Myths don't care about physical pragmatism. They strike a core that dates back to the phoenix rising from the ashes of mass extinction 65 million years ago. Right up to the modern day Cyclops which so many young people (including myself) stare at in our urban cave dwellings - a skewed reality at best is all we see with one eye - I am talking about television and monitors of course.
And, hence mythology is a respectable study. Even Einstein had a personal astrologer.
Also, not everything falls into the scientific method. Not every phenomenon can be addressed by science. The fact that the scientific method does not permit the investigation of abstract mathematical principles is especially embarrassing in light of one of its more crucial steps: “invent a theory to fit the observations.” A theory happens to be a logical and/or mathematical construct whose basic elements of description are mathematical units and relationships. If the scientific method were interpreted as a blanket description of reality, which is all too often the case, the result would go something like this: “Reality consists of all and only that to which we can apply a protocol which cannot be applied to its own (mathematical) ingredients and is therefore unreal.” Mandating the use of “unreality” to describe “reality” is rather questionable in anyone’s protocol.
We could also go into tautological constructs i.e. 1 + 1 = 2 … But this is probably better served in another thread.
Thank you.
Good God, man, use the Quote function. It's in the bottom right corner of each post.
Or you do it manually...
[QUOTE]STUFF[/QUOTE]
Reading stuff in quotation marks gets really annoying.
you must hate novelsQuote:
Originally Posted by Tavrobel
Entirely different situation. :rolleyes2 I don't like reading stuff in quotation marks on a forum either. It's a pain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not At All Renoyou must hate novelsQuote:
Originally Posted by Tavrobel
As for the rest of the stuff, I'm with Unne. :D
Could someone please explain the point of this thread? Preferably in a catchy song or jingle.
Besi, amidst all of his style over substance, is claiming that myths are more worthwhile than they actually are. He's made a number of claims, and failed to substantiate any of them as of yet. His purpose is being muddled by the above mentioned style over substance fallacy and his love for hifalutin rhetoric over actual addressing of points.
AKA Besi is trying to sound obscenely smart by using many claims that have no supporting facts. Fact being -proven- 100% correct. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryushikaze
I do, indeed. I prefer epics and poetry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not At All Renoyou must hate novelsQuote:
Originally Posted by Tavrobel