A devout Catholic friend once told me "if it cannot be quanitified, then it does not exist"

[Taverner]

Those words have stuck with me, and on my journey into Atheism, have become almost a mantra for me. I haven't found a single case where that wasn't true.

Funny that my friend, who is Catholic, would say that. But then again, it proves that there is rationality in the "one true church"

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. That's an utterly ludicrous statement,

and one that no scientist (no legitimate one, anyway) would ever accept.

[Taverner]

2. How so? Show me something that exists that cannot be quantified

And don't start with "love" because I can quantify that in a heartbeat. If anything, I can set up a qualitative study that does a word count.

[Dr. Strange]

7. Really?

So let's say two people love each other. How would you go about quantifying which one loves the other more?

Or how about quantifying the beauty of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata and Rush's Tom Sawyer, and then determining which is a better piece of music?

[Taverner]

8. OK - first define love

What is love, from a quantifiable measure? Is it the amount of testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin that is released in a lover's mind? Or is it a cocktail of the above? Either way, this is the chemical foundation of "love."

Or, do we want to be more qualitative and measure the output of a lover? Have them describe their lover, and have certain words counted. This is not the most scientific method, btw. I go for the brain chemicals personally.

And as for which is "better," that is a value judgment. Value judgments do not exist in themselves, but only exist in comparison to other judgments.

[CreekDog]

18. that difference is not quantifiable

:evilgrin:

[CreekDog]

17. How about "fail"

quantify that. :crazy:

[Rabrrrrrr]

37. I think we could quantify it to be about this much:

[Rabrrrrrr]

39. That doesn't measure love, that measures word count.

[rucky]

15. What would you rate it on the Ludicrous Scale?

"utterly" is about an 8, no?

[Rabrrrrrr]

38. I actually prefer the j to orangutan scale, so I rate it omega

[La Lioness Priyanka]

3. lots of things cant really be quantified. Like homophobia, sexism, racism

these are qualititative issues

[Taverner]

4. Yep

You can count the homophobic statements in a document, you can even rank them

You can even design an algorithm that weights statements in context...

[TZ]

5. I think you've gotten it a little mixed up

Its not really if its not quantifiable it doesn't exist...Its until something CAN BE quantified it is assumed not to exist. THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT DOESN'T exist though. This is the basis of the null hypothesis.

[Taverner]

6. Yes, but this is one of those reverse things...

The null hypothesis was what got us started on this, and the conclusion is that it works both ways...

[madinmaryland]

42. I can Quantify that the Washington Reagan-Natinals can't spell!!

:rofl:

[Mike 03]

9. Catch 22 question

Defining "quantified" as that which can be measured, if someone gives an example of something that can't be measured, you say it doesn't exist because it can't be measured.

It's a "gotcha" question.

Even scientific things can't be measured, like why particular cancer cells respond to certain novel agents while other identical cancer cells do not.

On Edit:

This topic is good enough for GD.

[Taverner]

10. Ah but that can be measured

Break them into two groups, those that respond and those that do not

There, quantified

[Mike 03]

11. Maybe what we mean is there are things that cannot yet be measured. NT

P.S.

Of course they have been broken into two groups and looked at.

No results yet.

[Taverner]

12. Well, yeah like "godliness,""faith" and "state of grace" for example

[Mike 03]

13. But I agree: It's wonderful to agree with you when it comes to something like Catholicism

or the Bible, which I personally doubt.

But the trouble comes when you run into legitimate phenomena, like some quirkier aspects of quantum theory.

Anyway, you have asked a stimulating-as-hell question, which is always appreciated!

I love debates like this.

I'm too tired to give my best tonight, but I'll be paying attention.

EDIT:

There are people who attempt to dispute Darwin on what they consider the same grounds. It is madness, but that type of irresponsibility is rampant right now.

[CreekDog]

19. what's a cubit?

[MorningGlow]

24. Riiiiiight!

:rofl:

[burning rain]

14. Not only is that a preposterous claim....

it doesn't even sound like Catholic teaching.

[Taverner]

20. He's not your run-of-the-mill Catholic

A co-worker of mine was living with his fiancee, but the slept in separate rooms...to avoid sex of course...

His analysis was "I can find you a Priest who will let you do that."

Pro-Gay Marriage, Pro-Darwin, Pro-Reason, Pro-Abortion, or "Pro-Death" as he calls it (he's Pro-DP too.)

Wants no religion in schools

Wants condoms to be available for free everywhere (condoms are cheaper than abortions.)

He claims he's a Libertarian, but he's never really shown any signs of Ayn Randism, and voted Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama.

But I tend to agree with this synopsis. If it cannot be quantified, then how are we expected to accept that it exists?

[CreekDog]

16. Love?

[Taverner]

21. Love is chemicals testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin...

and vasopressin

[Taverner]

23. By that, I mean that all of those chemicals can be measured.

Which means, "Love," once defined, can be measured.

[CreekDog]

26. How about Hubris?

:evilgrin:

[Taverner]

29. I am certain there is a chemical equation for that

Although it is a sliding window - everyone has a different genetic-based ability for tolerance

[CreekDog]

30. you realize that all your equations are simply models

they are abstracting reality so that we can grasp it or understand it.

[Taverner]

33. Yes, but the idea of "Love" is no more real than "Blue"

It's all meaningless, except in that we have defined them.

[rug]

22. Quantify hope.

[Taverner]

25. Do a study of the brain chemicals and then you can quanitify it

Hope is a personal thing. Just because person A has it doesn't mean person B does.

Hence, it is a brain chemical.

Measure the cocktail and you measure "Hope"

[rug]

27. Following, all human thought is a chemical reaction.

However, the chemical formula would not reproduce the thought.

Therefore, something else exists which has not been measured.

[Taverner]

28. Everyone's nervous system is different

The delta is the differences in projection

[LanternWaste]

31. Interesting...

Interesting... predestination via genetics. :P

[Taverner]

32. Not necesarrily

Who knows how the genetics, chemical stimuli, chemical reactions, etc will work?

No one does, and in the end it all boils down to chaos theory anyway....

[LanternWaste]

34. Daily Reminder #1303

Daily Reminder #1303: never make an oblique joke about the intersections of religious and scientific theories in most company again...

[FloridaJudy]

35. How long is the California coastline?

If you take it down to a microscopic level of sand grain to sand grain, it's nearly infinite. It's fractal in nature, and it's damned near impossible to quantify fractals - they keep expanding or contracting.

Doesn't mean the Mandelbrot set - or the California coastline - doesn't exist.

But then I'm a Buddhist, and I think weird.

[Pierre.Suave]

36. You should ask him

to prove god exists...

:rofl:

[cherish44]

40. There may be things our brains cannot quantify.

Nothing. Quantify that. You can't, nothing isn't a quantity, it's nothing

[cherish44]

41. Oh and if we are going by our linear version of time, there had to be "nothing" at one time

because how can something have always existed?