Quotessence
Home / Books / Extra Scientiam Nulla Salus: How Science Undermines Reason

Extra Scientiam Nulla Salus: How Science Undermines Reason

Book by Thomas Stark · 8 quotes · Science, Philosophy, Rationalism

Filter quotes by topic

Extra Scientiam Nulla Salus: How Science Undermines Reason Quotes

“Curing humanity of its madness is the biggest challenge there is. The only remedy is to subject everyone from the day they are born to an educational regime of reason, logic, clear and critical thinking, i.e. Logos thinking, and to teach them to see straight through emotional Mythos and understand it for exactly what it is: emotional lies to seduce, manipulate, exploit and control the gullible masses. The sensory Mythos of scientism is as dangerous as the emotional and mystical Mythos of mainstream religion. Only Logos – rationalism and idealism – can provide Ariadne’s golden thread to lead us out of the labyrinth of the lunatics where the Minotaur of Madness devours everyone ritually offered up to it. It’s time to slay the Minotaur and make humanity sane”

“Scientists are extremely keen on “common sense”, yet their hero Albert Einstein dismissively said, “Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen.” Your senses and your common sense are both insufficient to the task that scientism assigns to them. They don’t tell you shit. As Bishop Berkeley pointed out, you have no experience of any objective thing called “matter”. Instead, you have a subjective experience of a subjective idea of what you label “matter”. You always encounter the idea of matter in your mind. You have no non-mental encounter with anything called matter, so where is your evidence that matter even exists? As Berkeley demonstrated, “matter” is a redundant hypothesis.”

“Matter (Becoming) is entropic. Pure mind (Being) has zero entropy. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is said to predict the Heat Death of the universe. In fact, this is false. What it actually predicts is the death of matter, space and time – via the expansion of the physical universe until it flatlines and thus ceases to be. Evolution is about eliminating matter, and this is accomplished – exactly – at the end of the universe, in readiness for the creation of the next universe. Only at the end of the universe is Becoming not operating in conjunction with Being. However, as soon as Being reaches exclusivity (Becoming has ceased to exist), the first act of Being is to initiate Becoming again, and this is none other than the Big Bang, the cosmic eruption of Becoming across all monadic nodes, and the origin of the “splitting”of all monadic minds into separate centers of agency.”

“Why do people that ask for “evidence” never ask for rational explanation? What is more reliable? – analytic reason, or the unreliable, fallible, limited, frequently delusional human senses where it is guaranteed that they are showing us only phenomena and never noumena (i.e. things in themselves). You cannot understand reality as a phenomenon, although this is in fact exactly what science tries to do. You can understand reality only as a noumenon – as an intelligible thing in itself – and that’s exactly what ontological mathematics is all about. Anyone that obsesses over phenomenal evidence is an opponent of noumenal truth, which is never subject to phenomenal evidence.”

“Empirical evidence is not what counts. Rational proof is the only acceptable criterion of truth. If you cannot provide a sufficient reason for an argument you make, you do not have an argument. Sensory evidence is not a sufficient reason. It is not an argument. Sensory evidence is simply raw data. A million people could provide a million different ways of interpreting it, hence it’s meaningless. It has nothing to do with proof. “Evidence” concerns an appearance from which inferences may be drawn. It concerns that which is obvious to the eye. Yet what does “obvious” mean? What is obvious about sensory data? Color blind people don’t know what “blue” is. Tetrachromats, with four cone types in the eye (cone cells are responsible for color vision, while rod cells code for monochromatic vision) see color radically differently from normal people (i.e. trichromats with three cone types). People with synesthesia have drastically different sensory experiences from normal people. So, everything about the senses is mired in ambiguity, uncertainty and subjectivity. These are no organs for truth, i.e. organs that show us the truth of a thing, exactly what it is and everything about it. We see things in our dreams even though our eyes are closed. How can we see without eyes, how can we sense without sense organs? What’s for sure is that scientific empiricism and materialism won’t be furnishing any answers.”

“The whole shtick of scientism revolves around sensory evidence. How many times must it be said that there is no such thing as self-explanatory sensory evidence? All evidence must be interpreted, and the interpretation is not a perceiving activity but a judging activity. The catastrophic error that worshipers of scientism (autistic sensing types) commit is that they privilege perceiving over judging. They believe that perception is the most important thing, and that judgment must be directed to the maximum degree possible at the perception, and minimize and indeed eliminate any reference to anything that has not been perceived. For worshipers of scientism, perception comes first, and judging is secondary, determined by perceiving. That is what empiricism is all about. It claims that all knowledge comes from experience, that there are no innate ideas, and it revolves around synthetic propositions and a posteriori knowledge. Rationalism, by total contrast, asserts that knowledge comes from logical, rational deduction and that innate ideas form the only secure basis for knowledge. It deals with analytic propositions and a priori knowledge.”

“Blabbering on about “evidence” exposes the bankruptcy of your capacity to present a rational argument. No rational, necessary argument has any reliance whatsoever on empirical contingency. None of the eternal truths of reason requires any human senses, or any human experiences, or any human “evidence”. In other words, the eternal truths of reason – the rational basis of existence – have zero reliance on human science.”

“Science used to claim it understood the universe fairly well. Now it says that 95% of the universe is unknown to science. Anyone who scored 5% in a science exam would not be allowed to do science. Yet worshippers of scientism believe they are permitted to pontificate on the nature of reality despite being a 95% epic fail. They literally don’t know anything. Even their 5% of supposed knowledge is absurd since the remaining 95% is exceptionally unlikely to offer a defense of the 5%. Science – the Swiss Cheese System. It’s full of holes. It’s springing leaks everywhere. The rats are jumping off the sinking ship.”