zzombie;8606859 said:
right that's what science is in broad terms but wisdom is a judgement with what you do with the knowledge you gather also science has a particular way it comes to it's "objective truths".
Wisdom is not a judgment.
Oxford English Dictionary said:
wis·dom
noun
the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.
It's a
quality of,
1. good judgment (but also)
2. experience (and)
3. knowledge
By quality, that means wisdom is a "distinctive attribute" of something.
That something can include a method of attaining knowledge.
zzombie;8606859 said:
maybe i'm just being picky but that is not exactly what you said you said science was the manifestation of the wisdom of humanity. Which would mean that all human socities had a hand in creating the scientific method but that is not so
I didn't say
the manifestation of human wisdom; I said
a manifestation of human wisdom,
meaning there isn't one, and only one, manifestation of human wisdom ---
but many. The scientific method is one, but not the one.
zzombie;8606859 said:
abiogenesis is equally unsubstantiated, it's not testable because it has never happened we have no proof that it has ever happened and if we reproduce it in a lab that still won't be proof because that required intelligent intervention.
In totality the theory of abiogenesis is not just life coming from non-life it's life coming from non-life naturally scientist are trying to create it then study it you cannot study a phenomena that does not first exist and our being here is not proof that we came here through abiogenesis.
Life is carbon-based. Simple organic molecules
Are carbon based and sustain life ---
Fact.
Abiogenesis is all about how life sprang from those simple organic molecules.
When scientists attempt to recreate the atmosphere of early earth
To study how those molecules were able to make copies of themselves, they are investigating how abiogenesis
happened, not if it did.
We know it did.
zzombie;8606859 said:
i said OFTEN there is no objective truth in science because at a certain levels in certain sciences conclusions are created by interpretation of gathered information AND real truth is not up for interpertation
You can certainly explain the meaning of objective truth, which is what interpretation is...
Unless I'm missing something.
Scientific interpretation is
Oxford English Dictionary said:
The action of explaining the meaning of something:
‘the interpretation of data’
Artistic interpretation is different. It is
Oxford English Dictionary said:
A stylistic representation of a creative work or dramatic role:
‘two differing interpretations, both bearing the distinctive hallmarks of each writer’s perspective’
wisdom is a judgement. An action or belief has to be claimed be wise, people decide what is considered wise after the fact, after a choice has been taken. The outcome of the use of experience or knowledge to decide a course of action is deemed wise or foolish. if you just pull words from a dictionary it won't tell you the much about the actual word or concept it's just the raw meaning.
abiogenesis does not start with organic molecules it starts with those molecules coming into existence in the first place and that is the problem that makes abiogenesis basically impossible because it starts off from a weak footing to begin with because there is no definitive of what constitutes an organic molecule or compond.
yeah you must be missing something because you don't understand what the goals of science are.