DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**eliniaguilefp7m** · 07-16-2012, 08:11 AM

I am going to bring up a word I despise, that is narrative. Everything is nothing until a human puts a narrative to it.

The cat is in an unknown state until it is observed. But even when it is observed, what is it's state? It's state is that which the observer puts on it. Thus the narrative.

How do I know what is in the box if I did not put the items in there? Is there a cat in there? Is there an elephant in there? Does the person who puts the items in the box also perform the observation or does someone else perform the observation? Is their observation affected by the narrative from the person who put the items in the box? Did the person who put the items in the box give a narrative of the box and it's contents?

Scientists wrongly call these things observations. They are not. I don't think observations are possible by humans as they always put a narrative to what they observe. People sometimes call this perspective or framing. Either way the observation is tainted IMO.

Its like the guys with their haldron collider. If anyone watched that cartoon video explanation by the scientist or student dude. They already have their narrative. They will now fit their observations to suit. They are performing millions of "observations" per day or year or whatever the time frame was, but it was millions of observations so they can get a statistical anomally that fits their narrative. Imperfect science but I think it's the best we can do in our current mind set.

Here's one. Is the colour of the leaves of trees the same green for you and me? When I see green I see green but when you see green do you see green green or some other colour which to you is green but to me would be something else. Ignoring colour blind people. The only thing we can be sure of, is that the colour of leaves is consistent for me as it is for you, so we can only assume I see green the same way you see green but we can never be sure. Scientists would state they can be sure by poking around with receptors and such but all they can really test for is consistency.

07-16-2012, 08:11 AM	#3
eliniaguilefp7m Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 385 Senior Member	I am going to bring up a word I despise, that is narrative. Everything is nothing until a human puts a narrative to it. The cat is in an unknown state until it is observed. But even when it is observed, what is it's state? It's state is that which the observer puts on it. Thus the narrative. How do I know what is in the box if I did not put the items in there? Is there a cat in there? Is there an elephant in there? Does the person who puts the items in the box also perform the observation or does someone else perform the observation? Is their observation affected by the narrative from the person who put the items in the box? Did the person who put the items in the box give a narrative of the box and it's contents? Scientists wrongly call these things observations. They are not. I don't think observations are possible by humans as they always put a narrative to what they observe. People sometimes call this perspective or framing. Either way the observation is tainted IMO. Its like the guys with their haldron collider. If anyone watched that cartoon video explanation by the scientist or student dude. They already have their narrative. They will now fit their observations to suit. They are performing millions of "observations" per day or year or whatever the time frame was, but it was millions of observations so they can get a statistical anomally that fits their narrative. Imperfect science but I think it's the best we can do in our current mind set. Here's one. Is the colour of the leaves of trees the same green for you and me? When I see green I see green but when you see green do you see green green or some other colour which to you is green but to me would be something else. Ignoring colour blind people. The only thing we can be sure of, is that the colour of leaves is consistent for me as it is for you, so we can only assume I see green the same way you see green but we can never be sure. Scientists would state they can be sure by poking around with receptors and such but all they can really test for is consistency.
	Quote