I suppose mathematics might be an exception to my earlier claim

RBDB, which god do you believe in mate?

"and more letters behind my name than you can shake a stick at"

The letters A. R. S. E.
I can shake a stick at them (in fact I appear to be using said stick to whip those letters quite emphatically) .

You shaking your stick at my a rse is a pretty disturbing image RDBD

"which god do you believe in mate?"

The God of the 11th commandment :

Thou shall support no team other than Tottenham Hotspur FC. For I your god am the Y-i-d army, and will tolerate no other.

Vertonghen Groove *100% WUM free* (A.R.S.E)

Careful RBDB, in 2000 years that comment could be the new bible

You've completely missed my point.

Scientific discourse is always changing. Just because the dominant scientific theory is empiricism doesn't change the fact that at one time or another a different school of thought wasn't dominant and therefore seen as proof under the rules of that particular discourse.

Hence why I said it had been proven it was just using different reasoning to what we use today.

If that's true of then it's not ludicrous to suggest that in the future another school of thought will become dominant and supersede empiricism therefore making many theories redundant - it's happened before.

Isn't Vertonghen A.r.s.e. Groove more appropriate for your slightly unnatural interest?

Vert, Associate of the Reeto Society of Evolutionists.

Empiricism vs rationalism was always a purely philosophical debate, separate from science which has always and always will be founded upon EVIDENCE, although I understand the idea of evidence has evolved throughout the course of the world. If so, even more evidence will probably be needed in the future

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

"Careful RBDB, in 2000 years that comment could be the new bible"

What you mean , "could" ?? <burn the heretic>

Its a fair point Darren, though it seems likely that empiricism is now so engrained that it would be difficult to displace. Current scientific methodology required scrupulous process and review...it would be hard to develop something outside of it without evidence of improved rigour.

Do you believers think that us atheists will spend eternity in hell btw?

Do you believers think that us atheists will spend eternity in hell btw?

---

Yes.

"I suppose mathematics might be an exception to my earlier claim"

I believe mathematics is the language of God.
I am also fortunate to have CS as part of my academic background. It (Computability in particular) tells me what the limits are.

Sounds a lot more fun than Heaven anyway.

Besides we're Spurs...we go through Hell every season!

CS....co ck sucking?

Bales

Empiricism is the main method of enquiry in scientific method. It's all philosophy.

In that debate it appears that empiricism has become the dominant school of thought.

Evidence is subject, as history has shown.

That's is a fair point, Vertonghen. It does seem likely at the moment that it would be difficult to displace but I'm sure the overwhelming schools of thought believed this before.

We are talking long term thinking here so to dismiss the probability of it happening again, for me, is quite naive.

I find the history of philosophy fascinating and there does seem to be an arrogance among the contemporary in plenty of different eras, not just our own, that change isn't possible.

By the way, I'm athiest and conform to the ideas of scientific discourse just to me clear.

I just have an open mind as to what can happen in the future with regard to philosophy, science and religion.

Although even you guys are taking a 'risk', what if Allah is the real one, then you're all fecked as well

Darren, maybe I'm being narrow minded but for me science could never not be empirically based?

I agree about the arrogance/ignorance of believing change is impossible. Change is one of the few inevitables...its just the degrees of which those changes occur which should be up for debate

Analog...thats what I said to the God Squad last time they came knocking...what if you put your money on the wrong God?