"We've evolved to be creationists" Options

[zhenka11230]

Fortunately, reason can lead us beyond our incorrect intuitions. Special relativity, quantum mechanics, and atheism are all counter-intuitive, but correct. Nationalism is another wrong intuition to be overcome.

Beautifully said. I feel relieved that at least some people realize that intuition is not something "magical pointer to the truth" and is more like something to be critical of.

[Flex]

Fortunately, reason can lead us beyond our incorrect intuitions. Special relativity, quantum mechanics, and atheism are all counter-intuitive, but correct. Nationalism is another wrong intuition to be overcome.

How can you say these things are correct? They are only correct untill someone with a better sounding guess comes along...

[Rick]

How can you say these things are correct? They are only correct untill someone with a better sounding guess comes along...

It's not likely that special relativity or quantum mechanics will ever be overturned as "incorrect." Small adjustments, maybe, but the major schemes are fairly solid. However, our intuitions are ever suspect.

[Flex]

How can you say these things are correct? They are only correct untill someone with a better sounding guess comes along...

It's not likely that special relativity or quantum mechanics will ever be overturned as "incorrect." Small adjustments, maybe, but the major schemes are fairly solid. However, our intuitions are ever suspect.

Didn't they come to the conclusion of special relativity and quantum mechanics through intuition, which was later proven through emperical means? A hypothesis has to be created, it is not discovered--one has to know what questions to ask in order to make sense of or attain an answer.

[Rick]

Didn't they come to the conclusion of special relativity and quantum mechanics through intuition, which was later proven through emperical means?

Intuition often plays a role in discovery and creation, but intuition is often very wrong, and must be tested by reason. Many great feats of creation actually defy intuition. That's why many creative people are rididuled during their lives: most people intuitively reject their work, unable to see the greater possibilities.

[Flex]

Didn't they come to the conclusion of special relativity and quantum mechanics through intuition, which was later proven through emperical means?

Intuition often plays a role in discovery and creation, but intuition is often very wrong, and must be tested by reason. Many great feats of creation actually defy intuition. That's why many creative people are rididuled during their lives: most people intuitively reject their work, unable to see the greater possibilities.

Many people also create false systems based off of intuition that happen to be very practical, and these false systems are taken as truth--calculous anyone?

[Rick]

I think calculus is mostly true. Many mathematicians seem to think so. Newton used it to verify Keppler's rules.

[Flex]

I think calculus is mostly true. Many mathematicians seem to think so. Newton used it to verify Keppler's rules.

Instantanious change? If that is true (not just a close enough apporximation to be practical) I missed something.

[zhenka11230]

I think calculus is mostly true. Many mathematicians seem to think so. Newton used it to verify Keppler's rules.

Instantanious change? If that is true (not just a close enough apporximation to be practical) I missed something.

.Intuition can be true.
.Truth is always intuitive.

Those are very different statement


While it is true that intuition can lead to prediction of truth, it is not ALWAYS correct. Intuition is just a habit of perception. For example we are used to objects falling down so we have intuition that if i release this object it will fall down. We also are used to seeing cause and effect. If i hit this ball - it will move. That is also habit. Intuition is just an educated or habitual guess on something. It is not a magical pointer to the truth.

[Rick]

Instantanious change? If that is true (not just a close enough apporximation to be practical) I missed something.

You may be confusing physics with the mathematics used to describe it. Mathematics is an abstraction, a simplification of the real so that it can be more easily understood. Because mathematics is abstracted, mathematical things (theorems) can be proven true. Physical theory often has a mathematical expression. In classical physics, we can ignore Planck's constant, so it makes sense to speak of instantaneous change. Classical physics is also an idealization so that simpler mathematics can be applied.

Regarding intuition and creativity, I have found that most of my creative results are counter-intuitive. Intuition leads us on a well-worn path. Stopping to question intuition often leads to amazing insight. For example, the herd intuition has the sun going around the earth. Copernicus overcame that intuition by showing how a more thorough investigation leads to a simpler explanation.

[zhenka11230]

Instantanious change? If that is true (not just a close enough apporximation to be practical) I missed something.

You may be confusing physics with the mathematics used to describe it. Mathematics is an abstraction, a simplification of the real so that it can be more easily understood. Because mathematics is abstracted, mathematical things (theorems) can be proven true. Physical theory often has a mathematical expression. In classical physics, we can ignore Planck's constant, so it makes sense to speak of instantaneous change. Classical physics is also an idealization so that simpler mathematics can be applied.

Regarding intuition and creativity, I have found that most of my creative results are counter-intuitive. Intuition leads us on a well-worn path. Stopping to question intuition often leads to amazing insight. For example, the herd intuition has the sun going around the earth. Copernicus overcame that intuition by showing how a more thorough investigation leads to a simpler explanation.

I fully agree with you Rick. You show signs of completely transcending "magical thinking".

[Rick]

I fully agree with you Rick. You show signs of completely transcending "magical thinking".

Thank you. That has been one of my goals. More properly, the pursuit of truth leads me to reject magical explanations.

[Rinzai Dharma]

I fully agree with you Rick. You show signs of completely transcending "magical thinking".

Thank you. That has been one of my goals. More properly, the pursuit of truth leads me to reject magical explanations.

Rick,
What about the unified theory of physics? The quantum theory is only a true at a certain level. The theory of relativity also holds at another level. Aren't the physicists still in search of a unfied theory that will bind these two? Does this mean quantum theory is still not the final physical truth?

That's why physicists are still wrangling with alternative theories like the superstring.

[Rick]

Physicists have a lot of work to do. Even in every-day explanations, physical models are lacking. For example, there is no formula that converts the number of protons in an element into, say, a melting point. You have to take a sample and melt it to find out.

[HumanBeast]

I suppose Nature created religion to stimulate competition to diversify gene pools. But is Nature God itself?

[Rick]

I suppose Nature created religion to stimulate competition to diversify gene pools. But is Nature God itself?

Yes. The universe is the body of god. The mind of god is still under construction.

[trojan_libido]

That is a nice mind-jolting statement for the herd Rick.