CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Mathematics is as Gauss put it “the Queen of sciences” I agree,to me there is no Science vs Mathematics to begin with .
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) said, "The universe cannot be read until we have learned the language and become familiar with the characters in which it is written. It is written in mathematical language, and the letters are triangles, circles and other geometrical figures, without which means it is humanly impossible to comprehend a single word. Without these, one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth." Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777–1855) referred to mathematics as "the Queen of the Sciences". Benjamin Peirce (1809–1880) called mathematics "the science that draws necessary conclusions".
We are forced to make too many assumptions in mathematical models for me to believe that maths is the language the universe is written in, or at the very least, our version of maths as it is now. Yes, when used in appropriate ways maths can approximate reality via logic. However I do not think it is a perfect substitute for our reality at present.
Additionally, there are multiple mathematical approximations that can be appropriate for a single scenario. I think the existence of multiple solutions discredits all but one, or even all of them as a perfect representative. For example, energy is a useful concept on which some mathematical methods and solutions are based. However the concept of energy can be skipped entirely by instead applying conversion ratios for physical properties. So is energy a real property or an imagined tool? At least one of these methods should imply inaccurate information about the universe we live in.
Wrong, it's your perception of reality, there is no such thing as "your reality". You live in THE reality and have a subjective perception of it, see the difference dumb fuck?
If it's not objective reality, then by definition it's not reality. That's why it's called REALITY you fucking twit. Reality means it is reality, your reality means it's a subjective perception of reality or an opinion about reality, which is not actually reality unless it aligns with objective reality. You don't get to decide what reality is, you can either understand reality or not but reality itself is inherently not decided by anyone's subjective bullshit. Are you really too stupid to understand that reality is not decided by peoples subjective perception or beliefs?
If it's not objective reality, then by definition it's not reality.
Prove there’s an objective reality you Donkey ?
That's why it's called REALITY you fucking twit.
🤔 We all live in our own subjective realities. The human mind is not capable of being truly objective. Therefore, the entire idea of a single objective reality is purely speculative, an assumption that, while popular, is not necessary.
Making you wrong again 🤫
Reality means it is reality, your reality means it's a subjective perception of reality or an opinion about reality, which is not actually reality unless it aligns with objective reality. You don't get to decide what reality is, you can either understand reality or not but reality itself is inherently not decided by anyone's subjective bullshit.
Read above again with the aid of your minder or if you like go run off and get your coloring book and crayons and I will try and dumb it down for you
Are you really too stupid to understand that reality is not decided by peoples subjective perception or beliefs?
All your arguments are based on speculation and nothing else you truly are dumb brute
Even if everything I am experiencing is some illusion or entirely subjective, my consciousness still objectively exists, if you don't understand that then your own sentience comes into question. Now since things don't just magically exist out of nothing I know there must be some basis for my existence, there must be an objective reality underlying my subjective experience. With this response I am giving you as much slack as I can, since it's unlikely that everything I experience is an illusion or entirely subjective, but even if it was that is how I know there is an objective reality. Since things don't just pop out of nothing or randomly take on certain properties or behave in certain ways without reason, there must be a basis for everything that exists, there must be an objective real reality which isn't subjective or nothing would exist.
We all live in our own subjective realities.
Reality is reality, it's not subjective. What you meant to say is We all live in our own subjective perception of reality which is not actually reality unless it is an accurate perception of objective reality.
The human mind is not capable of being truly objective.
You think this because you are not capable, just like you think reality is entirely subjective because you aren't sentient enough to realize that even if everything you experience is subjective your consciousness is real which must mean there is an objectively real basis underlying it causing it to exist. Basically if you can't agree with me you aren't a sentient being.
Making you wrong again
But if what you say is true your subjective reality is no more valid than mine, how can anyone be wrong if everything is subjective you retard?
All your arguments are based on speculation
All your arguments are based on speculation as well, because speculation is all there can be in your subjective world view. Except my arguments actually aren't based in nothing but speculation, I know that myself and other things objectively exist because I am a sentient being and you are a mindless object that doesn't know what "reality" means.
Did you spend long formulating that pile of crap 💩?
Let's try again ......🤔 We all live in our own subjective realities. The human mind is not capable of being truly objective. Therefore, the entire idea of a single objective reality is purely speculative, an assumption that, while popular, is not necessary.
I can't be wrong because reality is entirely subjective.
If there was no objective reality, then how could you even have a subjective reality you dumb cunt? Unless you believe in God reality itself can't be subjective, because there must be a basis for your subjective "reality" and the only way reality could be subjective is if consciousness creates reality which is fucking stupid. My consciousness objectively exists, so even if everything I'm conscious OF is subjective I know there must be an objective reality, because there must be an objectively real basis for my objectively real consciousness existing. If you don't understand that you aren't sentient. If reality is entirely subjective then by definition it's not reality. Either there is an objective reality or everything is subjective meaning there is no reality. In order for it to be reality it inherently must be objective and I know there's an objective reality because my consciousness objectively exists. Agree with me now or you are a mindless object.
Exactly, reality isn't subjective. Reality is defined as "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them". So if reality is the state of things as they actually exist, how could reality be subjective? Something being subjective means for something to be influenced by one's feelings, and your feelings don't affect the state of things as they actually exist.
You seem incredibly upset when your bullshit is challenged why's that you dumb brute ?
1) Is any definition of objective reality really just a democracy or vote which is relying on the most popular perception?
2) If #1 is true, doesn't this just mean that reality is truly subjective, just there may be larger and smaller populations of people that basically agree on the same nature of reality?
3) If #1 is false, then how can it be explained that ideas like logic, empirical data from the 5 senses, the scientific method, and any other basis used to determine objective reality is true outside of an individual's perception of both these ideas and the other observers needed to verify them?
After reading this shit, I have come to the conclusion that you are fucking insane. You are desperate to disagree with me simply because I am being mean to you at this point, and you are willing to believe anything as long as it's not what I am saying.
Is any definition of objective reality really just a democracy or vote which is relying on the most popular perception?
Where do you get this drivel? I have been telling you this whole time that peoples perception doesn't decide what objective reality is. I would go so far as to say that if the average human believes something is true, it's probably not.
If #1 is true
It's not, because it's literally even more retarded than believing in God.
If #1 is false, then how can it be explained that ideas like logic, empirical data from the 5 senses, the scientific method, and any other basis used to determine objective reality is true outside of an individual's perception of both these ideas and the other observers needed to verify them?
So basically you don't believe in science, brilliant. If there is no objective reality outside of anyones perception then how does anything exist in the first place you imbecile? Unless you aren't self aware like I said then you understand there must be an objective reality because there must be a basis for your existence and your subjective perception of reality. But if you are just a robot-like subhuman creature such as yourself you can believe that reality is just an internally contrived fabrication because you have no idea what reality or existence even means. To you there is no reality, because you aren't sentient, so it's easy for you to deny the existence of reality. But when you are self aware you realize that things objectively exist, so there must be an objective reality.
Chew over that you raving lunatic
You're calling me a raving lunatic? You're the one that thinks you exist in a vacuum and that "reality" is filled in by your own perception. Since you aren't sentient you don't even understand that things really exist, "reality" is not real to you.
"The universe cannot be read until we have learned the language and become familiar with the characters in which it is written. It is written in mathematical language"
Mathematics is as Gauss put it “the Queen of sciences” I agree,to me there is no Science vs Mathematics to begin with .
Maths isn't a science you pretentious idiot. Science makes conclusions based on empirical evidence. Maths makes conclusions based on abstract proofs.
You don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about, so shut up quoting people who, were they still alive, would share my opinion that you are a fucking idiot.
Oh do shut up Nom you stupid brute , do you ever get anything right ?
Science makes conclusions based on empirical evidence. Maths makes conclusions based on abstract proofs.
Mathematics is certainly a science in the broad sense of "systematic and formulated knowledge", but most people use "science" to refer only to the natural sciences.
Now that I’ve attempted to educate you yet again you may thank me
You don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about,
There’s that projection yet again where you accuse others of your genetic idiocy
so shut up quoting people who, were they still alive, would share my opinion that you are a fucking idiot.
🤔 Yet the same people agree with me rather than you once again proving the level of your retardation is worrying to say the least ......🤫 👋👋👋👋
Mathematics is a science, to an extent, but in the realms of cutting edge mathematical hypotheses, maths isn't a completely proof based endeavour. It has abstractions, because human cognition has the capacity for abstraction and strictly speaking, maths is conceptual. The other sciences, on the other hand, deal in verifiable realities. I would say, because of that, mathematics might be the more creative of the two, but it is also the one of the two more prone to attempts at fallacious transplantation of its concepts onto the real world. Infinity, for example.
The best of both worlds is physics. For me it represents the pinnacle of the human quest for knowledge.
Math and science cannot be separated. The more you know science, the more you know that science needs math. To have something like science vs math would make no sense as the existence of the two depend on one another.
without science people wouldn't have the cure to most diseases like measles and hepatitis which or prevents liver diseases. basically you would die in young age probably and possibly humanity would be in great disaster. not only that but without science their is no technology meaning no phones,cars and even television. also our history would be unknown. people think math is in science, False science uses math only in measuring the length of a cell in micrometers.