create account

RE: Intuitive Knowledge vs Knowledge Based on Reason by builderofcastles

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com

Viewing a response to: @martin-stuessy/re-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-intuitive-knowledge-vs-knowledge-based-on-reason-20161218t001749861z

· @builderofcastles ·
I, in no way believe that science is incompatible with intuition.  Without intuition we wouldn't have any new discoveries.

What I was trying to say is that you cannot scientifically study intuition.  The constraints that science currently works under, pushes intuition away.  Its like a box, that inside the lab is empty, but in a forest it is full of wondrous stuff.
properties (22)
authorbuilderofcastles
permlinkre-martin-stuessy-re-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-intuitive-knowledge-vs-knowledge-based-on-reason-20161218t011119775z
categoryphilosophy
json_metadata{"tags":["philosophy"]}
created2016-12-18 01:13:30
last_update2016-12-18 01:13:30
depth3
children2
last_payout2017-01-18 00:44:03
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length368
author_reputation274,866,010,808,969
root_title"Intuitive Knowledge vs Knowledge Based on Reason"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,030,026
net_rshares0
@martin-stuessy ·
Sorry for misinterpreting your comment there. I definitely agree that science pushes intuition away. But I also think that it's possible to scientifically study intuition. That doesn't mean that it results in a successful study that boils intuition down to its physical/chemical mechanism. But it does mean that we can try to learn about it with controlled experimentation.
properties (22)
authormartin-stuessy
permlinkre-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-re-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-intuitive-knowledge-vs-knowledge-based-on-reason-20161218t012929476z
categoryphilosophy
json_metadata{"tags":["philosophy"]}
created2016-12-18 01:29:33
last_update2016-12-18 01:29:33
depth4
children1
last_payout2017-01-18 00:44:03
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length373
author_reputation19,100,061,932,073
root_title"Intuitive Knowledge vs Knowledge Based on Reason"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,030,132
net_rshares0
@builderofcastles ·
I agree with what I think you said.

But, I disagree with you symantically.
Science - from the same root worth as scythe.  To cut apart.  Or taking apart to understand.  Breaking everything down.

There is also putting things together to understand them.
physics and metaphysics are not two separate fields.  They are one continuous whole.  And when you discard metaphysics, you end up with stupid science that can't understand consciousness or intuition.

Whatever we call the study of things happening in the future, that will be able to study intuition.  And, there is already great amounts of detailed study on intuition in mystic traditions like Zen and Buddhism.
properties (22)
authorbuilderofcastles
permlinkre-martin-stuessy-re-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-re-builderofcastles-re-martin-stuessy-intuitive-knowledge-vs-knowledge-based-on-reason-20161218t034222524z
categoryphilosophy
json_metadata{"tags":["philosophy"]}
created2016-12-18 03:44:30
last_update2016-12-18 03:44:30
depth5
children0
last_payout2017-01-18 00:44:03
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length668
author_reputation274,866,010,808,969
root_title"Intuitive Knowledge vs Knowledge Based on Reason"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,030,709
net_rshares0