Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 16:42:29 UTC No. 16465078

>>16465066
There are some circumstances where the "why" is easier to determine than others. As an example, if you have a clear mol-bio reason for a particular disease or reaction, that's pretty solid. For example, it is occasionally the case that we can track down individual genetic mutations that cause disorders.

These cases where we have a strong "why" instead of just correlational analysis are pretty rare, all things considered.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 18:44:25 UTC No. 16465215

>>16465066
Why = How until you get to the most fundamental

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:01:38 UTC No. 16465230

>>16465215
>>16465066
Though why also usually refers to consciousness and a person's actions, wherein you may know how a person does something but not why

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:03:12 UTC No. 16465234

It takes a different kind of science than these people are used to. Don't anger or oppress the NPCs here.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:03:58 UTC No. 16465235

>>16465215
Choose one:
>prime cause
>infinite linear chain of cause-effect
>cyclical chain of cause-effect
>self-caused
No matter what you choose it's crazy.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:06:25 UTC No. 16465243

>>16465235
The same can be said about "how", how do you explain how

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:16:08 UTC No. 16465255

>>16465235
>>16465243
Resolution, specificity gradient from most general to most detailed.

How does a tree grow: snkight, water, soil, nutrients
Why does a tree grow, how does water, soil, nutrients make it grow:

Physics, chemistry, biology, rain cycle, seeds, DNA, star mechanics, em field,

How why so these things work: the cause and effect lawful proportions of physical logic

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:23:38 UTC No. 16465264

>>16465255
>Physics, chemistry, biology, rain cycle, seeds, DNA, star mechanics, em field,
>How why so these things work: the cause and effect lawful proportions of physical logic
How Why are they exactly what they are?
Either (per Einstein), God had or didn't have a choice to make them as such, or the universe is mindless genius

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:25:21 UTC No. 16465265

>>16465243
The observer describes past, current and expected observation with labels for and correlations between this, that and the other. For some people that's all there is to know but for others it's not.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:30:18 UTC No. 16465273

>>16465255
>>16465264
Logic and laws are not perceived but cognized and abstracted as non-physical entities.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:05:25 UTC No. 16465309

>>16465273
>Logic and laws are not perceived
Logic and laws exist prior to symbolizing them.

Youre saying: the symbols I write that symbolize nature don't exist before I write the symbol. Yes the word apple did not exist before it was written.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:11:03 UTC No. 16465313

>>16465273
>Logic and laws
Again an earlier post: specificity gradient from most general to most detailed.
Moat generally, Logic is yes no, 1, 0, on off, identity, cause and effect, non contradiction. Detailedly it's everything computers and the universe can do.

Generally laws is: the stuff from that big yellow thing is always hot.
When I drop this rock it goes down.
When I let go this helium balloon it goes up.
Detailedly it's general relativity and special and more.

But all the non apparent, non explicitly given info beyond initial base perception, is still trying to accurately formulate and form over that which is there and that which is and which functions as it does and can

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:13:07 UTC No. 16465315

>>16465313
Why like how and what is a compound address for human psyche. Finding the 'what' of 'why' can be easily dismissed of not fulfilling the 'why' of 'why'.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:19:09 UTC No. 16465317

>>16465235
Reality discovered The Good a long time ago and seeks to see the ways it can allugn itself with it

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:24:09 UTC No. 16465322

>>16465315
Cannot compute the clarity of your intention

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:26:41 UTC No. 16465323

>>16465322
What is what. Surely you're met with the same predicament as what is why. They're both compound addresses.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:39:14 UTC No. 16465338

>>16465066
>Can you scientifically find out "why"-something is?
Ooh. Short answer 'yes' with an 'if'. Long answer 'no' with a 'but'.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:41:14 UTC No. 16465342

>>16465066
Newton showed why Kepler was right.
Einstein showed why Newton was right (and where he was not).
So, yes.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 21:09:11 UTC No. 16465364

>>16465235
Hehe yeah
We are not that close to the bottom anyway imho.

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 22:20:14 UTC No. 16465403

>>16465066
no, theres only correlations
mappings between events
nothing causes anything, nothing has explanations, its just a series of mappings

Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 22:24:05 UTC No. 16465405

The How and the Why are the same fucking thing holy shit

You can just as easily say WHY does the fire burn, just as you can say HOW does the fire burn

Dumb fucking scientists think philosophy is useless but they are retarded and they can’t even escape taking philosophical positions whenever they do a theoretical or hypothetical physics

GOD I hate them

Don’t even respond to this post I’m not coming back here

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 02:58:57 UTC No. 16465646

>>16465273
>>16465309
When you drop or throw an apple at 2 different trajectory arcs, the trajectory arc of the apples is a mathematical reality whether the math has been detailedly cognized and formalized or not, and the gravitational causes of that arc is a network of physical logics whether it is formated and known in ink and mind or not

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 03:12:42 UTC No. 16465661

>>16465315
>>16465323
Why how does an apple fall.
Why how does a piece of paper fall different than an apple.
The apple is a what composed of what's.
The piece of paper is a different what composed (shaped) differently.
The air is a certain what composed of whats.
Gravity is a certain what composed of what's.
All the relevant elements force the conclusion of why how the apple falls differenty than the piece of paper.


I mentioned the notion of why tending to have more relevance to minds and that as seen asking why of aspects of unmindful nature is asking (as I now see you put it) the how of the what.
You may see someone walking down the street and every 10 steps they twist around and clap their hands twice. You have twisted and clapped your hands before, you understand how, you may not know why they are doing this.

There is 'what' there is.
Many different whats.
What occurs, is 'how' they interact.
'Why' they interact how they do, is because what they are is what they are, what everything is is exactly what it is, and there is a 'sensible' consistency(laws) based on the quantity and quality of whatnesses.
Whats are limited as being what they are, they can only possibly perform a finite number of things as themselves, their finite potentials are the limiting laws of them. (I.e. it seems a single electron cannot spontaneously inflate to be the size of the moon)

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 03:26:00 UTC No. 16465669

>>16465661
Why comes after what. Why is like a more advanced query than what, and it allows us to navigate through all there is to discover, and many other things.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 03:27:21 UTC No. 16465671

>>16465669
Taking it all into account... - why.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 03:34:40 UTC No. 16465677

>>16465313
>Most generally, Logic is yes no,
While the answer to the question would you like peas with your dinner may boil down ultimately to a yes or no: the path to get to that result may require reasonings: I had peas the 3 previous night, I don't really feel like eating anything green today, I don't like to eat any tiny round balls generally, I'm already quite full I don't think I need anything more, I could have carrots and potatos and Brussel sprouts and brocolli rabe instead, I could have 5 or 10 or 11 or 7 or 17 or 22 or 4 peas, you asked if I would like some peas but if I only want 1 pea right now I must answer no because you asked plural, so ultimately yes I will have 3 peas thank you

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 03:39:40 UTC No. 16465680

>ITT retards discover philosophy

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 04:43:22 UTC No. 16465720

>>16465066

Science cannot answer "why?" anything happens, only "how?". The fundamental reasons things are the way they are (Why?) is unknown and likely unknowable. They "just are".

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 06:55:16 UTC No. 16465813

>>16465720
Why is an electron the size it is and not smaller or larger?
How is an electron the size it is and not smaller or larger?
Why does electron have the quantum spin it has?
How does electron have the quantum spin it has?
Why do charged particles have the quantity of charge they have?
How do charged particles have the quantity of charge they have?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:38:36 UTC No. 16465861

>>16465235
Prime cause and self-caused are both cyclical causes. You forgot No Cause.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:43:06 UTC No. 16465863

>>16465861
You can't have adults without children
You can't have effects without causes.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:48:11 UTC No. 16465866

>>16465863
>You can't have effects without causes.
The word for effect without cause is spontaneous or in statistics they call them random.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:51:37 UTC No. 16465868

>>16465863
>You can't have adults without children
But you can have big rocks without small rocks or oceans without puddles, in fact usually the smaller rocks are often the result of big rocks fracturing, but not necessarily, you don't need big rocks to have small rocks either.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:55:27 UTC No. 16465869

>>16465866
Academic infused propaganda allowing Politicians and Educators to swindle us and get away with many crimes.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 08:59:36 UTC No. 16465870

>>16465869
Take the left for example.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:06:04 UTC No. 16465873

>>16465870
Then what caused the left to be opposite of the right?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 11:16:23 UTC No. 16465904

>>16465873
Differing views.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 11:56:21 UTC No. 16465917

>>16465904
No, they are defined as different views, it isn't the cause, and I wasn't even just talking about politically, what causes things to be different rather than the same as everything else?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 11:57:25 UTC No. 16465918

>>16465917
Whoa.
You're retarded.
I will refrain from taking you seriously.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 11:59:48 UTC No. 16465920

>>16465918
I accept your concession, you have no idea what causes differing views to differ, you can only recognize differences between views and try to put them on some random spectrum based on semantics.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:46:44 UTC No. 16465937

>>16465868
>But you can have big rocks without small rocks or oceans without puddles, i
Big rocks are made of small rocks called atoms, cant have big rocks without them

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:50:45 UTC No. 16465940

>>16465920
>have no idea what causes differing views to differ,
Increase of sample size would likely increase the odds of difference

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:51:04 UTC No. 16465941

>>16465937
No, atoms are made of energy spread across space, not rocks.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:52:36 UTC No. 16465942

>>16465940
Too bad your side already established ITT that statistics is just academic infused propaganda.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:55:55 UTC No. 16465944

>>16465941
>No, atoms are made of energy spread across space, not rocks.
Are there spread equal sizes, or do big rocks have bigger atoms and small rocks have smaller atoms?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:57:09 UTC No. 16465945

>>16465942
>Too bad your side already established ITT that statistics is just academic infused propaganda.
Have 10 wolves, likely their opinions and views don't differ all too much but they still get into arguments

Have 400 million people, more likely there will be some differences

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:57:23 UTC No. 16465946

>>16465944
Atoms don't have to be rocks at all.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 12:59:28 UTC No. 16465947

>>16465945
1 person can have different conflicting opinions about the same thing too, its called cognitive dissonance.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:01:33 UTC No. 16465948

>>16465947
Yes so let's return to my initial statement you some reason thought incorrect:

Greater sample size, greater room for differences, unless you are suggesting communism or socialism where everyone is more united and on the same page.

If you are for freedom you are for difference

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:02:34 UTC No. 16465949

>>16465946
A)You can have big without small.
B)Everything big is made of small.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:03:19 UTC No. 16465950

>>16465948
Yes and difference can be spontaneous, it doesn't have to have a cause, someone can randomly decide they have a different favorite color than before, it doesn't have to have a cause.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:05:28 UTC No. 16465952

>>16465949
>>16465949
>B)Everything big is made of small.
Not true, protons are significantly bigger than electrons, but they aren't made of them.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:10:33 UTC No. 16465953

>>16465950
>someone can randomly decide
Okay, I personally didn't even know what we were discussing or arguing about, I was just attempting to make true statements. So what are you discussing or arguing about, where is the train of thought leading. The topic is the nature of cause and effect, the possibility of a causeless cause or causeless effect, again a free will determinism can of worms is opened, and then as others mentioned the differences of convincing others subtley or otherwise what to think or believe for whatever reason.

So you believe a person changes their favorite color always has 0 causes? There is never a line of activity, for instance even believing in such thing as favorite color? And very likely it would never occur out of the, blue, likely someone would have to see or contemplate on another color for them to even consider changing it, or, contemplate and reflect on their current favorite, and discover or realize something about it that now seems unliked

Answer honestly cause know this is interesting and I believe I have disproven that first attempted example.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:12:06 UTC No. 16465955

>>16465952
Everything bigger than subatomic.
But okay we found an out, protons are made of quarks and gluons and even still, your example of rocks, is this called goalpost moving?
Anyway I lost the thread what is your thesis?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:15:03 UTC No. 16465958

I'll admit it though, the left do leave a nice random essence, free of danger, to live with. Trump just makes this better in my opinion. Your work won't be wasted.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:20:11 UTC No. 16465959

Mouf

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:21:23 UTC No. 16465961

>>16465952
>protons are significantly bigger than electrons, but they aren't made of them.
Their mass is bigger but size isn't. Also what would they be without each other

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:22:19 UTC No. 16465962

>>16465955
>Anyway I lost the thread what is your thesis?
Random events are spontaneous, not caused.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:26:09 UTC No. 16465966

>>16465953
>So you believe a person changes their favorite color always has 0 causes?
They don't need a cause to change. Subatomic decay isn't caused, it is a random process.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:27:09 UTC No. 16465967

>>16465961
Not made of each other.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:27:23 UTC No. 16465968

>>16465962
>Random events are spontaneous, not caused
Random natural events and/or mental events?
You didn't offer any suggested proof of the color example, you just claimed it could happen that it could happen

I tried to consider it and found the unlikelihood a person could be walking down the street and randomly think green! No longer teal, it's green that's my favorite:

Would you not agree it is far more likely for them to see a color that sparks this thought or reflect on their current favorite and then consider another
Provide another example of mental randomness please, I work with mentally impaired people, so that may be close to a baseline proof for you but on further thought it is likely all their random actions have causes. But try another example of something random

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:28:24 UTC No. 16465969

>>16465967
Fundamental is called fundamental, you started with rocks, what is your essential point

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:29:31 UTC No. 16465971

>>16465966
>They don't need a cause to change. Subatomic decay isn't caused, it is a random process.
Did you look inside and watch the whole time to make sure no causal substance interactions caused the subatomic decay?

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:50:58 UTC No. 16465985

>>16465962
>Random events are spontaneous, not caused.
On further random reflection, I must cautiously partially concede the point, that mental processes can produce a randomality to the observer, but am compelled to believe that is due to:

The brain/mind being a system of a billion continually moving complex parts with very scales and energy levels compartments and networks: and that it's goal is to keep processing and churning, and it has its stores of memories and imageries and words, and the main awareness control user you and I are not entirely in control of all these processes, so it mechanically and random number generatory, and real time sense data from here and there and up and down and smell and sight and taste and broad and specific vision and body feelings all at once and alteratingly continously, that thoughts and memories as the Buddhists and new agers might say, do just randomly appear, or as frued jung et al may say, subconcious and unconscious and more

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 14:01:53 UTC No. 16465993

>>16465985

To the observer, conscious viewer, images, thoughts, sensations appear randomly: to the crazy, perfect, awesome, slightly messy brain forced to continually churn out it's pistons pumps of energetic chemical mechanical activities, it is no spooky action at distance, any part touching another part that touches another part that touches another part that touches another part that touches another part

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Nov 2024 14:38:39 UTC No. 16468303

>>16465813
How? It's relative mass and energy. Why those factors make something the way it is? Who knows, but those are the rules.

How does an e- take on spin? there are many ways to induce/alter spin such as magnetic fields.Why do they "spin"(they don't "really" spin, of course)? They just do.

The "quantity" of charge is a measure of relative energy not an absolute value fixed by god, or something. Lump more e- together, things get more (-), lump more p+ together, things get more (+). Why does "addition" exist? Who knows.

Besides, "why?" won't help you in Science. "Why did I get AIDS?" b/c OP is a fag, but here is HOW the HIV virus works and HOW we can treat it. "Why did god invent AIDS in the first place?" Because he is the source of all eternal wisdom.

Anonymous at Sun, 10 Nov 2024 06:26:15 UTC No. 16469321

>>16468303
The charge situation, fundamental charge is interesting, it is quantified, it is considered quarks have fractional charges, supposedly either -1/3rd or +2/3rd, try to figure that out and then tell me what you think it physically means.

I mean the electron is attracted to the nucleus/proton: the nucleus/proton makes a compelling field the electron falls and becomes trapped in:

What is the distanal extent of the nucleus/protons attractive field-warp/inward-pull-wave?

At how many planck lengths away from the nucleus/proton does the electron become irresistiably physically compelled?

And the quantization of a single electrons charge is 1.602 x 10^-19

Which means, the electromagnetic field has a ____________ of __________
Which causes the electron to __________
When the electron crosses this ___________ threshold of proximity to the nucleus/protons charge force extended field

Anonymous at Sun, 10 Nov 2024 22:15:52 UTC No. 16470033

>>16469321
>nucleus/proton makes a compelling field the electron falls and becomes trapped in:
The nucleus/proton influence their most immediate local field, the electron influences it's most immediate local field such that when their influenced fields cross a threshold of proximity, it becomes more difficult for them to separate than remain

Anonymous at Mon, 11 Nov 2024 01:01:34 UTC No. 16470200

>>16465235
>LE CONTINUUM FALLACY

Anonymous at Mon, 11 Nov 2024 02:19:14 UTC No. 16470304

When you bring S pole of bar magnet to S pole of another bar magnet and feel resistance, what are you feeling, photons being shot out of the S ends?

Anonymous at Mon, 11 Nov 2024 02:21:09 UTC No. 16470307

>>16465066
Science explains the how religion explains the why.
The former explains how the world materially mechanistically works and the latter explains the nature of conscious experience.