can we at at least agree then certain
things are non-quantifiable -
in that however much or how little
of a quantity that "exists"
or "does not" exist does not disturb
its (the "existent" or
"non-existent") quality?
(i just wanted to say the above,
the lower tier addition is, by my standard
of introspection, mere jargon).
there's no real satisfaction in
obtaining a quantifiable parameter
for a being that said quantifying
being desires a necessitated answer
to begin with...
there is no god
other than man in god, as primarily
instrumental to deface a need for
languishing desire for sabbath...
not everything in this world
is perpetuated by a fathoming
quantity - measure -
some things simply require a quality
and what is almost immediately
unmeasured - a qualified ordinance;
dare i apologise for sounding
like a quack?
science nonetheless quantifies,
it does not delve into quality -
to science 1% alcohol is just as true
for 40% content of a litre of ***** -
there just simply isn't a
"proof" for a god...
because there's no
quantifiable "evidence" for said existence...
and the "proof" of
a qualifying "proof" is twice-more
non-existent than the object in question
"desirably" requiring a proof of: existence!
we can quantify the speed of light,
but we can't exactly intact the quality
of travelling at said speed.
i'm not trying to dumb
down the process of an "investigation" -
it's only that the humanities belong with
the question,
the sciences could never, and
ever will give a life-insurance worth of
a question-answer....
why would the science ever give
an answer, and drain the immediacy
of a thrill away so easily?
p.s.
something that has no quantity-parameters,
is only quantifiable
if quantifiable at all,
within the framework of
a quality-reliability
structure...
but having said that,
a quality-reliability is not exactly
quantifiable when compared
to a quantity-replica
(there is no quantity-replica with
newton, there only was, one newton) -
it's sad seeing science become wasted
upon the "question" of god,
since there is no worthwikle
investigation for a necessary measurement,
other than the body count of
the next jihadist.
as ever, a much anticipated
unwelcome affair of discussion / "despair".
Nov 3, 2017
Nov 3, 2017 at 11:37 PM UTC
can we at at least agree then certain
things are non-quantifiable -
in that however much or how little
of a quantity that "exists"
or "does not" exist does not disturb
its (the "existent" or
"non-existent") quality?
(i just wanted to say the above,
the lower tier addition is, by my standard
of introspection, mere jargon).
there's no real satisfaction in
obtaining a quantifiable parameter
for a being that said quantifying
being desires a necessitated answer
to begin with...
there is no god
other than man in god, as primarily
instrumental to deface a need for
languishing desire for sabbath...
not everything in this world
is perpetuated by a fathoming
quantity - measure -
some things simply require a quality
and what is almost immediately
unmeasured - a qualified ordinance;
dare i apologise for sounding
like a quack?
science nonetheless quantifies,
it does not delve into quality -
to science 1% alcohol is just as true
for 40% content of a litre of ***** -
there just simply isn't a
"proof" for a god...
because there's no
quantifiable "evidence" for said existence...
and the "proof" of
a qualifying "proof" is twice-more
non-existent than the object in question
"desirably" requiring a proof of: existence!
we can quantify the speed of light,
but we can't exactly intact the quality
of travelling at said speed.
i'm not trying to dumb
down the process of an "investigation" -
it's only that the humanities belong with
the question,
the sciences could never, and
ever will give a life-insurance worth of
a question-answer....
why would the science ever give
an answer, and drain the immediacy
of a thrill away so easily?
p.s.
something that has no quantity-parameters,
is only quantifiable
if quantifiable at all,
within the framework of
a quality-reliability
structure...
but having said that,
a quality-reliability is not exactly
quantifiable when compared
to a quantity-replica
(there is no quantity-replica with
newton, there only was, one newton) -
it's sad seeing science become wasted
upon the "question" of god,
since there is no worthwikle
investigation for a necessary measurement,
other than the body count of
the next jihadist.
as ever, a much anticipated
unwelcome affair of discussion / "despair".