Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« on: February 14, 2020, 10:28:43 AM »

When reading up on the atmolayer lip hypothesis I noticed references to the "infinite earth", the idea that our world is an infinite plane. How is this notion even remotely compatible with zeteticism?

Infinite earth is conceptually analogous to the nonsensical idea that Earth rests on "turtles all the way" and is thus axiomatically impossible to inquire about. No FE experiment conceived on zetetic grounds can show an infinite plane to be either true or false - one could always argue that that you didn't venture far enough to see the edge.

Is the hypothesis about the Earth as an infinite plane really viable from a zetetic point of view or do I miss something? A  discworld makes more sense in the FE context, me thinks...


*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7166
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2020, 11:55:49 AM »
Both an infinite earth and a finite earth with an edge would be a hypothesis. How can you say that one is wrong for being a hypothesis and the other makes more sense?

What 'makes more sense' is based entirely on a present state of mind. An infinite earth has its merits because that's what you apparently observe when looking out at the world -- a seemingly endless plane. It could also be argued that it makes more sense that we live on a plane which bisects the universe rather than a celestial body; that the earth is a fundamentally different realm of existence.

A finite earth could make more sense in the context of the UA mechanism for gravity, a philosophy of mediocracy, or under an idea that infinity is unreasonable. Most of it seems to boil down to what you personally can believe is more reasonable, rather than physical impossibility.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 10:31:11 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline RoundLurker

  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Lurking since early 2018.
    • View Profile
Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2020, 03:42:34 PM »

When reading up on the atmolayer lip hypothesis I noticed references to the "infinite earth", the idea that our world is an infinite plane. How is this notion even remotely compatible with zeteticism?

Infinite earth is conceptually analogous to the nonsensical idea that Earth rests on "turtles all the way" and is thus axiomatically impossible to inquire about. No FE experiment conceived on zetetic grounds can show an infinite plane to be either true or false - one could always argue that that you didn't venture far enough to see the edge.

Is the hypothesis about the Earth as an infinite plane really viable from a zetetic point of view or do I miss something? A  discworld makes more sense in the FE context, me thinks...

When empiricism or traditional science doesn't come up with the right answer, Tom resorts to "but what if" logic.

From what I've seen here, the accelerating (UA) flat Earth theory seems to be the most cogent in respect to FET (that's not saying much), or at least seems to have the fewest holes in it. 
The person in my avatar does not exist, and that's unsettling.

Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2020, 10:28:15 PM »
I must admit, I'm impressed with the UA theory. There's some questions in my mind though... 1) Dark matter annihilates with matter upon contact, so why does it exist under our disk of matter, 2) Why would the dark matter accelerate with the earth if it is the main repelling force, and 3) If there is in fact material outside our bubble, what else is out there?

Story time: I live in Texas and had a friend from New York visit who has never seen cows. When he saw a feed lot, all the cows were black. Later, we went to my aunts' home and she had a brown cowhide rug. My friend was baffled because to him, he saw hundreds of black cows and no brown, white, or spotted cows and assumed black was the only variety of cow. Silly Northerners.

You are like my friend when you say "It seems flat, so that's the most likely conclusion". You don't need to understand reality for it to be real. I don't understand quantum mechanics, but thank goodness that it still works without my comprehension. You must rise to the level of comprehension required by reality. You can't change reality to match your comprehension. Tom hasn't made a conjecture like this in this thread, but I've seen it in other threads from him and others.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 10:45:35 PM by ImAnEngineerToo »

Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2020, 07:22:03 AM »
One makes hypothesis to narrow things down in order to facilitate experimental inquiry. Assuming the Earth to be an infinite plane does the opposite. It is an axiom, not a conclusion based on experience, unless one regards limited eyesight or fatigue as experimental proof of infinite Earth.

Rather, just as vision and stamina (and the various colours of cows) are limited qualities, so is everything in the physical universe. All we can observe is limits and boundaries. Infinity is invoked as a convenient solution when observational powers aren't enough. What sense does it make if one argues the latter to be proof in this matter?

True, I don't have to understand reality for it to work. Assuming infinity though means assuming a reality by definition beyond comprehension and more importantly: beyond question. That is poor zetetics as well as poor science in general, wouldn't you agree?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7166
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2020, 04:14:35 PM »
Chapter 1 - Zetetic and Theoretic Defined and Compared

Quote
THE term Zetetic is derived from the Greek verb Zeteo; which means to search, or examine; to proceed only by inquiry; to take nothing for granted, but to trace phenomena to their immediate and demonstrable causes. It is here used in contradistinction from the word "theoretic," the meaning of which is, speculative--imaginary--not tangible,--scheming, but not proving.

None can doubt that by making special experiments, and collecting manifest and undeniable facts, arranging them in logical order, and observing what is naturally and fairly deducible therefrom, the result must be more consistent and satisfactory than the contrary method of framing a theory or system--assuming the existence and operation of causes of which there is no direct and practical evidence, and which is only claimed to be "admitted for the sake of argument," and for the purpose of giving an apparent and plausible, but not necessarily truthful explanation of phenomena.

So, in the wiki we are not taking the finite or infinite nature of Earth for granted until further research. It is put forward as a possible outcome without declaration of truth or falsity. Unlike many elements of astronomy, neither the scheme of a finite or infinite world is declared for the sake of argument, or is used to give a plausable but not necessary truthful explanation.

This exploratory and investigative approach to discovery sounds like what Rowbotham wrote about Zeteticism to me.

A suggestions that we should take something for granted and to declare one outcome as truth for sake of argument is how astronomy went wrong in the first place.

Rowbotham doesn't have a problem with talking about hypothetis'. The book is full of them. He teaches that things beyond our ability of direct study is a matter of belief, and should be treated as such, rather than one option declared as true.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 05:03:37 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2020, 04:46:53 PM »
Rowbotham doesn't have a problem with talking about hypothetis', the book is full of them. He teaches that things beyond our ability of direct study is a matter of belief, and should be treated as such, rather than one option declared as true.

Are there other sources commenting on Zeteticism? It would be nice to see other philosopher's views and criticisms on that, since following a single source is quite far from being scientific and quote close to being a cult.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7166
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2020, 05:44:31 PM »
Rowbotham doesn't have a problem with talking about hypothetis', the book is full of them. He teaches that things beyond our ability of direct study is a matter of belief, and should be treated as such, rather than one option declared as true.

Are there other sources commenting on Zeteticism? It would be nice to see other philosopher's views and criticisms on that, since following a single source is quite far from being scientific and quote close to being a cult.

That would be a good topic to look into for an article. You should help us look into it.

Philosophy scholar and professor Daniel Tanguay, at the University of Ottawa seems to think that the Zetetic Philosophy is a valid philosophy:

https://books.google.com/books?id=HcR3bVP7qvUC&pg=PA201&dq=%22zetetic+philosophy%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyu6eejNTnAhUFCM0KHcmjDu0Q6AEIOzAD#v=onepage&q=%22zetetic%20philosophy%22&f=false

The search term "zetetic philosophy" seems to bring up much other interesting commentary in other works as well.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 11:35:46 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Infinite Earth and zeteticism
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2020, 09:27:19 PM »
That would be a good topic to look into for an article. You should help us look into it.

Philosophy scholar and professor Daniel Tanguay, at the University of Ottawa seems to think that the Zetetic Philosophy is a valid philosophy:

https://books.google.com/books?id=HcR3bVP7qvUC&pg=PA201&dq=%22zetetic+philosophy%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyu6eejNTnAhUFCM0KHcmjDu0Q6AEIOzAD#v=onepage&q=%22zetetic%20philosophy%22&f=false

The search term "zetetic philosophy" seems to bring up much other interesting commentary in other works as well.

I can help with an article shortly explaining Pyrrhonian skepticism, that is the very first known zeteticism.

I also found Marcellot Truzzi Zetetic Scholar, that is more tuned to what I see in FEs: https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb34482.x

But overall a direct criticism of the Zetetic Cosmology would be needed.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".