*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« on: November 02, 2018, 01:24:50 AM »
Many REers (I have noticed) lambaste the zetetic method and FEers who use it. This is, in my opinion, an error. The zetetic method lays the groundwork for the method REers use anyway: the scientific method.

If one follows the zetetic method to its logical conclusion, then one will derive the scientific method eventually. This is how the scientific method was created; this is what we call history. Contemporary zetetics merely reverse the clock, and begin their thought-process a couple millennia divorced from the achievements that zetetic methods have thus far produced.

Let me state that again. The zetetic method is not novel. What FEers call the zetetic method, is what the rest of the planet calls the scientific method minus about 1-2 thousand years. There is absolutely no problem with individuals seeking to begin this process anew without the benefit of all the progress that has been made. Such an endeavor is, in reality, quite scientific. And honest! We should support such efforts.

And we should also seek honesty in that exploration.

True zetetic investigations are historic, Galileo being one of the greatest zetetics to have lived. He championed direct observation even when doing so threatened his life. We should strive to be equally ruthless. Even if the results contradict what feels safe, or familiar. This is true zetetic practice, and it is emotionally difficult. But worth it.

In true zetetic fashion, I have visited a Foucault pendulum in London. I have watched it precess, across the hour. In true zetetic fashion, I need to form an explanation (i.e., a model) to explain this behavior. In true zetetic fashion, my explanation should match other explanations made about my reality. They should meet -- they should support each other. Otherwise reality is divisive. I seek an explanation congruent with my reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum


MattyWS

Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2018, 09:07:59 AM »
To ignore thousands of years of human progress and start over is pretty daft though. Without progress and learning from previous experiments and experiences we as a human race would be nothing.

As an example, your phone was made because engineers learned from last year's model, they didn't start again with no information every time they wanted to make a new model of phone. And when a new engineer starts his job making new phones do you think he starts from scratch with no knowledge or do you think he uses all of the information gained from the other engineers?

We'd still be in the dark ages if we never use other people's knowledge to help us gain more knowledge.

So when everyone around the world unanimously know the world is a globe after thousands of years experience and for someone to just l say "you know what, I'm going to ignore all that and say it's flat" is akin to that engineer from the example starting his new job and saying "Nah I don't need any of your information, I'll just learn everything from scratch with no help" - and if that happened we would be talking  about this via two cups and a string...

Offline JCM

  • *
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2018, 07:53:19 PM »
Many REers (I have noticed) lambaste the zetetic method and FEers who use it. This is, in my opinion, an error. The zetetic method lays the groundwork for the method REers use anyway: the scientific method.

If one follows the zetetic method to its logical conclusion, then one will derive the scientific method eventually. This is how the scientific method was created; this is what we call history. Contemporary zetetics merely reverse the clock, and begin their thought-process a couple millennia divorced from the achievements that zetetic methods have thus far produced.

Let me state that again. The zetetic method is not novel. What FEers call the zetetic method, is what the rest of the planet calls the scientific method minus about 1-2 thousand years. There is absolutely no problem with individuals seeking to begin this process anew without the benefit of all the progress that has been made. Such an endeavor is, in reality, quite scientific. And honest! We should support such efforts.

And we should also seek honesty in that exploration.

True zetetic investigations are historic, Galileo being one of the greatest zetetics to have lived. He championed direct observation even when doing so threatened his life. We should strive to be equally ruthless. Even if the results contradict what feels safe, or familiar. This is true zetetic practice, and it is emotionally difficult. But worth it.

In true zetetic fashion, I have visited a Foucault pendulum in London. I have watched it precess, across the hour. In true zetetic fashion, I need to form an explanation (i.e., a model) to explain this behavior. In true zetetic fashion, my explanation should match other explanations made about my reality. They should meet -- they should support each other. Otherwise reality is divisive. I seek an explanation congruent with my reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

You may be one of the only true zeteticists here then, because most FE people ignore observations or walk away from debate entirely.  If a person views star trails at the equator they see two spiraling apparently spherical trails it has implications.  The zeteticist would acknowledge the reality of those implications and continue their journey of discovery.  The next thing might be the movement of the polar axis point in the sky as you travel north and south and consider those implications.  Then when the zeteticist moves past the 0 degrees latitude, Polaris isn’t visible at some point as it dropped below the horizon meanwhile new stars have come up in the south.  Then the zeteticist continues traveling south seeing new stars and constellations noticing the stars south of 0 degrees latitude are revolving the southern celestial axis in a different direction then the northern stars around their axis. These are simple observations which are only possible one type of shaped earth.  Real zeteticists discovered the world was a sphere long ago.  Everything since has just been more evidence and clarification.

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2018, 10:55:36 PM »
Many REers (I have noticed) lambaste the zetetic method and FEers who use it. This is, in my opinion, an error. The zetetic method lays the groundwork for the method REers use anyway: the scientific method.

If one follows the zetetic method to its logical conclusion, then one will derive the scientific method eventually. This is how the scientific method was created; this is what we call history. Contemporary zetetics merely reverse the clock, and begin their thought-process a couple millennia divorced from the achievements that zetetic methods have thus far produced.

Let me state that again. The zetetic method is not novel. What FEers call the zetetic method, is what the rest of the planet calls the scientific method minus about 1-2 thousand years. There is absolutely no problem with individuals seeking to begin this process anew without the benefit of all the progress that has been made. Such an endeavor is, in reality, quite scientific. And honest! We should support such efforts.

And we should also seek honesty in that exploration.

True zetetic investigations are historic, Galileo being one of the greatest zetetics to have lived. He championed direct observation even when doing so threatened his life. We should strive to be equally ruthless. Even if the results contradict what feels safe, or familiar. This is true zetetic practice, and it is emotionally difficult. But worth it.

In true zetetic fashion, I have visited a Foucault pendulum in London. I have watched it precess, across the hour. In true zetetic fashion, I need to form an explanation (i.e., a model) to explain this behavior. In true zetetic fashion, my explanation should match other explanations made about my reality. They should meet -- they should support each other. Otherwise reality is divisive. I seek an explanation congruent with my reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

You may be one of the only true zeteticists here then, because most FE people ignore observations or walk away from debate entirely.  If a person views star trails at the equator they see two spiraling apparently spherical trails it has implications.  The zeteticist would acknowledge the reality of those implications and continue their journey of discovery.  The next thing might be the movement of the polar axis point in the sky as you travel north and south and consider those implications.  Then when the zeteticist moves past the 0 degrees latitude, Polaris isn’t visible at some point as it dropped below the horizon meanwhile new stars have come up in the south.  Then the zeteticist continues traveling south seeing new stars and constellations noticing the stars south of 0 degrees latitude are revolving the southern celestial axis in a different direction then the northern stars around their axis. These are simple observations which are only possible one type of shaped earth.  Real zeteticists discovered the world was a sphere long ago.  Everything since has just been more evidence and clarification.

Whereas I do agree that I am probably the only pure zetetic here, I must admit that everything else you wrote is such complete crap that I cannot understand one single sentence of it.

Are you trying to sound smart? Don't do that. Instead, talk about the things you actually know. In doing this, you will talk to folks who know more than you do, and thus you will learn. Over the period of many years of doing this, you will learn a great deal. Then, you will find that you do not need to pretend to know shit: you will actually DO (if you get my meaning).

Indeed, you will soon see that knowing shit is not what is important. What is important is the ability to think. If you can think critically, then you can outshine most of the bullshit that is heaved your way. Of which there will be plenty, over the course of your life.

THINK.

*

Offline Sushi

  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2018, 02:42:08 AM »
QED, if you cannot understand what JCM wrote, maybe you should go back to school to learn basic English.
You just show how  you are ignoring everything around you. Not Zetetic

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8408
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2018, 02:46:30 AM »
Whereas I do agree that I am probably the only pure zetetic here, I must admit that everything else you wrote is such complete crap that I cannot understand one single sentence of it.

Are you trying to sound smart? Don't do that. Instead, talk about the things you actually know. In doing this, you will talk to folks who know more than you do, and thus you will learn. Over the period of many years of doing this, you will learn a great deal. Then, you will find that you do not need to pretend to know shit: you will actually DO (if you get my meaning).

Indeed, you will soon see that knowing shit is not what is important. What is important is the ability to think. If you can think critically, then you can outshine most of the bullshit that is heaved your way. Of which there will be plenty, over the course of your life.

THINK.

Well, it has been fun. Have a nice life.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Offline Pinky

  • *
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Re: Zetetic Methods Are Good Methods!
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2018, 01:37:30 PM »
Many REers (I have noticed) lambaste the zetetic method and FEers who use it. This is, in my opinion, an error. The zetetic method lays the groundwork for the method REers use anyway: the scientific method.

If one follows the zetetic method to its logical conclusion, then one will derive the scientific method eventually. This is how the scientific method was created; this is what we call history. Contemporary zetetics merely reverse the clock, and begin their thought-process a couple millennia divorced from the achievements that zetetic methods have thus far produced.

Let me state that again. The zetetic method is not novel. What FEers call the zetetic method, is what the rest of the planet calls the scientific method minus about 1-2 thousand years. There is absolutely no problem with individuals seeking to begin this process anew without the benefit of all the progress that has been made. Such an endeavor is, in reality, quite scientific. And honest! We should support such efforts.

And we should also seek honesty in that exploration.

True zetetic investigations are historic, Galileo being one of the greatest zetetics to have lived. He championed direct observation even when doing so threatened his life. We should strive to be equally ruthless. Even if the results contradict what feels safe, or familiar. This is true zetetic practice, and it is emotionally difficult. But worth it.

In true zetetic fashion, I have visited a Foucault pendulum in London. I have watched it precess, across the hour. In true zetetic fashion, I need to form an explanation (i.e., a model) to explain this behavior. In true zetetic fashion, my explanation should match other explanations made about my reality. They should meet -- they should support each other. Otherwise reality is divisive. I seek an explanation congruent with my reality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

I asked this in the forum a while ago and did not get an answer: What is the zetetic method? Where can I find a definition?