Ciambawildcat said:
A valid point.
I guess what I really mean is that I don't like it when people view the world solely as cold hard facts. It is good to explore the world around you, to try and gleam information from your discoveries, to put thought into trying to understand things, and to learn from the thoughts of others. However, sometimes people seem to lose the sense of mystery in this big old expansive universe. I think some people don't think about why we are probing everything with science. They just digest facts and regurgitate them.
I guess I just enjoy philosophical discussion, rather than true and false arguments. Some people assume that everything they learn in school is proven. We are constantly discovering that we are wrong about things. Really a great deal of what we "know" about the world is just theory anyway.
So it's good to learn. I definitely agree with you. I just think that something as mysterious as love can't really be explained by scientific fact. It is a realm more for feeling than thinking (though they both have their place).
I really only meant that statement in the context of love.
Yeah, but love can actually be described with cold hard facts regarding biochemical processes in the brain.
Like Al Pacino said in The Devil's Attorney: "Love... Chemically no different than eating large amounts of chocolate." which is true in some ways.
But that goes for pretty much all feelings. Everything we feel is brought on by a few set levels of different hormones in the brain and receptors taking up those hormones.
What we don't know however is the psychology behind feelings. In fact, psychology isn't really a valid science but more a collection of theories (most of them based on nothing at all other than Freudian musings). Which is why I have a severe distrust of psychology being applied as a practical science (which many societies have chosen to do for some strange and equally stupid reasons)
So while we might know exactly which hormones makes us feel in a certain way, no one can be really sure what brings these feelings or behaviours about.
In fact if you scanned the bloodvessel activity in the brain of a normal family man and compared the results with those of a homocidal psychopath their patterns could look indistinct from eachother (in fact one such test has been made and gave these results).
Some big fans of Darwin claim that all behaviour and all feelings are a result of natural evolution. This is also just a theory and an invalid one as well. Since humans engage in a wide variety of behaviours which makes no evolutionary sense at all. (like homosexuality or suicide)
And when you point out these things, the only possible explaination they come up with is that such people are "sick" or "abnormal" in some way. And frankly I find that response to be tainted with a severe degree of hubris, because it implies that this person has an understanding of nature and nature's "intentions" with life.
Nature is just a force, brought on by an uncountable number cause and effect scenarios, in a chain so vast the human mind simply can't comprehend it, so we have just invented a term for it called "random chance". In reality, nothing happens due to random chance. Everything has a cause and every cause results in some sort of effect.
And if we can't even begin to hope understanding the infinite chain of cause and effect, how coul anyone hope to understand nature? How could anyone claim what is really "natural" and "unnatural"?
We can't. It's impossible. We can observe nature and draw our own conclusions (becaue it's the only way for humans to actually grasp their surroundings), but we can never be sure of any real intention or "correct way" for anything really.
Hehe, how's that for philosophical and scientific musings? : )
