>>21257373guess we're on bant now lol, this is the problem with 4chan these days. one interesting thread and it's gone lol
Appreciate the replies! without wanting to seem like I am arguing or trying to get into a debate or anything, because hey everyone has different and evolving filters on how we access underlying knowledge (or whether or not knowledge is actively synthesized, destroyed, the list goes on), I'll offer a few notes I suppose
>I'm not religious nor do I think the Abrahamic religions offer anything useful in regards to how the world works.religion underpins metaphysics and the structure (or even post-structuralist methods) through which science and engineering operate. even the concepts of Logic, Reason, the scientific method, are still predicated on metaphysical concepts. you can reach or "feel" these concepts through theology. empiricism, naturalism, materialism, realism, etc.
> it was always a circular definitionThis is the fun part, because of the relational nature of knowledge, and how concepts build upon other concepts, with Faith as the genesis or cornerstone. as a more grounded example, think about the wave/particle duality. and if you want to talk symmetry, think about CP violations. it has implications with regard to the nature of reality and mechanics as well.
> I have immense respect for scientists and mathematicians who with their intelligence could deduce something that I never could have in a million years.Same, and often even harder is induction. "Seek truth from facts" -Mao Zedong, On Practice
>I think it is impossible to come to a true understanding of liberal arts without having a scientific or mathematical background.completely agree
