From there, Andy uses knowing himself as an example.
. . . if you want to get to know what I’m really like, you could buy and read my books. . . . But there’s an even better way: you could ask those who know me, or get to know me personally yourself.
Think of the ramifications of Andy’s suggestion: “. . . or get to know me personally yourself.” What an alternative! What about getting to know God personally? Andy mentions Daniel Dennett’s unproved claim of materialism:
There is only one sort of stuff, namely matter.
Dennett goes on to make another amazing claim without proof:
The mind is somehow nothing but physical phenomenon. In short, the mind is the brain.
Dennett went on about the materialism of human thought. He claims human thought …show more content…
He did this based on axiomatic thinking. Yet Dennett still thinks he’s rational and that everyone ought to listen to him. And he doesn’t even seem to notice the conflict.
As we already discovered, the axiomatic thinking fallacy isn’t a rational basis of thought and is the most basic of all fallacies. That’s because axioms are simply assumptions that are dogmatically believed without proof. Axiomatic thinking says:
I made this up. Therefore, it’s true.
To clarify, axioms are claimed to be universally true without proof. And reasoning is always based either on divine revelation or on axiomatic thinking fallacies. So we again see that revelation is the only way to have a true premise and to be rational.
Scientific Method
Contrary to popular belief, there’s no agreement on a single scientific method among philosophers of science. If we search the Internet, we find several systems for scientific method. And many of the websites break scientific method into distinct steps.
The definition of ‘science’ has haunted philosophers of science in the 20th century. The approach of Bacon, who is considered the founder of the scientific method, was pretty straightforward: observation → induction → hypothesis → test hypothesis by experiment → proof/disproof → knowledge. ~
. . . if you want to get to know what I’m really like, you could buy and read my books. . . . But there’s an even better way: you could ask those who know me, or get to know me personally yourself.
Think of the ramifications of Andy’s suggestion: “. . . or get to know me personally yourself.” What an alternative! What about getting to know God personally? Andy mentions Daniel Dennett’s unproved claim of materialism:
There is only one sort of stuff, namely matter.
Dennett goes on to make another amazing claim without proof:
The mind is somehow nothing but physical phenomenon. In short, the mind is the brain.
Dennett went on about the materialism of human thought. He claims human thought …show more content…
He did this based on axiomatic thinking. Yet Dennett still thinks he’s rational and that everyone ought to listen to him. And he doesn’t even seem to notice the conflict.
As we already discovered, the axiomatic thinking fallacy isn’t a rational basis of thought and is the most basic of all fallacies. That’s because axioms are simply assumptions that are dogmatically believed without proof. Axiomatic thinking says:
I made this up. Therefore, it’s true.
To clarify, axioms are claimed to be universally true without proof. And reasoning is always based either on divine revelation or on axiomatic thinking fallacies. So we again see that revelation is the only way to have a true premise and to be rational.
Scientific Method
Contrary to popular belief, there’s no agreement on a single scientific method among philosophers of science. If we search the Internet, we find several systems for scientific method. And many of the websites break scientific method into distinct steps.
The definition of ‘science’ has haunted philosophers of science in the 20th century. The approach of Bacon, who is considered the founder of the scientific method, was pretty straightforward: observation → induction → hypothesis → test hypothesis by experiment → proof/disproof → knowledge. ~