>>11155105>So a far better theory of increasing the survival of our population is to increase our knowledge of the material world and minimize global sufferingradical and uncritical assumption. what a joke. you're letting your religious dogmatism show.
>sufferingpoor assumption again also what does that even mean? more shitty dogmatism.
I didn't imply anything. I don't think anything particular about it, just that according to modern western views it would be seen as wrong.
>application more baseless dogmatism.
>reduction of sufferingcan you guess what I'll say? and that dogmatic statement does NOT actually have anything to do with your scientific method. Because that isn't the most optimized method for creating a society that is effective at collecting truth (not saying I agree with such dogmatism, but just stating that you're not thinking effectively due to shitty priori, instilled throughout your life.)
also the question of action is a serious one. I find the entire concept to be incredibly contradictory.
>caring about children or the world[insert predictive phrase]
>The scientific method is by definition a system of not following dogma.the follow that sentiment.
Abstract truths obviously have no meaning, stop acting purposefully retarded.
>optimizing the scientific method in a scientific method societyI wonder what I have to say about that.
I agree personally and dogmatically with what you say in the end. I think it's very based. but as a an abstract purist I know ethics is nothing more than dogmatic bullshit, and thus I have no philosophy for how society should act, it is meaningless to think it should or shouldn't in any way x or not x.
Why should I care that pedophiles or islamist exist? I am not in the business of destroying dogmatism, that's just plain dogmatic.
