Comment on It's just obvious

ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• stupidcasey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Not me, I’ve fundamentally proven all possible aspects of my life and know all that I believe is entirely objectively, ontologically, metaphysically, epistemologically, and logically True.

  I also happened to understand the absolute nature of Ethics but that’s besides the point.

  source

  • ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    You should start a YouTube channel! 😅

    source

    • stupidcasey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Obviously I shouldn’t or I would already have known to do that.

      source

      • siha@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        What if you just forgot?

        source
• a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  I don’t know, I’ve seen models that are pretty darned accurate.

  source

  • ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    But even the best map remains a map, not the terrain. Our mental encapsulations of reality will always be lacking and we fundamentally cannot reach omniscience, even with all resources put together. 🤷

    source

    • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Given these limitations, our goal should not be closer and closer adherence to some unknowable objective reality, but instead more and more useful models in terms of their effect on the happiness of ourselves and others.

      source

      • ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I feel like we can do both, we can’t just deny eccentric physicists the pleasure of better understanding the universe! 😅 Even if we most likely won’t find construct some “last theorem”, even if reality is itself not just epistemologically unknowable but physically so as well the building blocks of reality are not actual blocks but something less permanent, there’s value in getting as close as possible. The other side is for philosophers, sociologists and psychologists, and the world is big enough for all of us. 👍

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      The uncertainty principle requires physical things to be small enough for it to matter.

      There are many provably accurate mathematical models.

      source

      • ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I just threw that out there for a material approach but even otherwise what is is unknownable, but what we perceive is something we can work with. And that’s the whole point: mathematics are simply not a description of reality, but a tool for understanding what we explore in reality through physics, biology, chemistry, etc., it’s a solid framework to understand the universe, but by itself it says nothing about it, it only says something about logic and understanding itself, and it’s limitations (Russell’s paradox, for instance). This is extremely useful and foundational, ofc, but all of our geniuses worked within these walls and all of our “knowledge” comes with this caveat.

        source