What is knowledge used for?

Since I was a child, I have been taught that knowledge can change fate, but I never thought about it, is this true? Can knowledge really change fate? Or can what can be changed be called fate?

Yuan Changwen found that he had been thinking, and his former self was thinking all the time. Now think about it, what are you thinking? Not to mention, most of my thinking is based on fear, and the mere result of thinking is a kind of nonsense.

Is there anything more than thinking with that limited knowledge and cognition? I can't think of a good outcome at all, I just choose a good outcome within what I know. But how small and nonsense this choice and trade-off is for the functioning of the whole world.

That knowledge can be used as a show off when chatting, can be used as your own talking point, and can participate in a brainstorming and other answering competitions. But no one ever asked, what is this knowledge?

Does this world exist? Is this world really developed according to time? Is this so-called knowledge real?

The highest mountain, the longest river, what is the knowledge built on the world for?

It's like game backgrounds, if someone really reads those game backgrounds word for word, and as something to show off, isn't that?

Of course you can do this, Yuan Changwen felt more and more that he had no opinion on what others did. I used to have a feeling of not vomiting and unhappy, and I always fantasized that I could educate others, change other people's minds, and let others no longer live in the distortion of their minds.

But now, others are just the presentation of picture elements. I want to change other people's minds, which means that I admit many assumptions, such as "someone else is a real person and not an artificial intelligence", "when I can't see others, others still exist", "all this is not a fixed number, but has a causal relationship, a linear passage of time"......

What could be funnier than this?

The fact that this world is false means that this knowledge is also false. I don't have any opinion on wanting to use knowledge to get more money, get a higher position, and get a better life.

But to kill, these things must be discarded.

I don't understand why knowledge has this power, and if it weren't for brainwashing, I don't believe that anyone would believe in knowledge so much, so much in science.

This is a kind of brainwashing mode with the sect, repeating experiments. The sect would list what supernatural powers a certain person had obtained, and everyone began to join the sect. The same is true of science, and isn't that true of validation tests in schools.

Something has happened, some theory has been tested, and there is no doubt about believing these things. But it is very obvious that any theory, even if it has been tested countless times, I still don't know if it will be overturned next time.

Right, after all, I'm not omniscient, so it's impossible to know. So, am I being brainwashed by believing in science so much and believing in science so deeply?

There are loopholes everywhere, how did you believe in science so much in the first place?

First of all, just because a theory has been verified does not mean that the theory is true. Secondly, I can't be sure if it's verified, after all, how do I know what the memory is in my head. There is also an explanation of the law, whether we should first ask whether the law exists or not. The existence of objective things is also the premise of studying objective things.

Don't talk about extremes, isn't this kind of extreme inquiry the so-called scientific spirit? That is to say, science has been defeated by science itself?

Science, observing things, summarizing laws, putting forward hypotheses, and verifying hypotheses. If the verification is successful, many times, then this hypothesis becomes a theory. Then, no one knows that the so-called theory is just a hypothesis, but instead treats it as true.

The purpose of scientific theories is only to explain the world that I have observed, so should we first determine the reality of this world? Or should we not discuss this issue and assume that the world we observe is real, and then study the laws of this world?

The shooter theory is exactly like this, a target is hit by the shooter several holes, and the holes are evenly distributed. Then for the two-dimensional creatures on the target, their scientists will inevitably claim that a hole will appear in this universe every certain distance.

The key point is that the two-dimensional creatures on the target will inevitably observe this phenomenon and think about theories to rationally explain why a hole appears every time their universe passes a distance.

For the two-dimensional creatures on the target, maybe these holes will always be there, and they won't affect their lives, and they don't need to know about the archer's existence. Moreover, those theories about the hole will always be tested, because the shooter has walked away and there will be no more interference with the target.

Then, for the two-dimensional creatures on the target, it doesn't matter whether there is a shooter or not. There is a hole in their universe every distance they pass, and this is the universe they observe, and this is their objective thing. There is no need to distinguish at all how these holes are presented, there are already holes anyway, then the holes are recognized.

Then, on the basis of it again, a series of theories were developed.

The problem is, I'm slashing, not for a better life. What is true? Scientific theories are not true, so just discard, it's as simple as that.

Those who promote social progress, those who get rid of ignorance and ignorance, are simply nonsense. Scientific theories and flood stories are the same essence, both hypotheses about phenomena and verification.

Could it be that the myths of the flood have not been verified? For thousands of years, these things have never been verified about the thunder and lightning mother, about the water monster causing the flood, and so on?

If the annual sacrifice can't get the effect, who will go to the sacrifice?

These flood myths will continue to circulate only when they are verified. There are monsters in those rivers that eat virgins every year, and if they don't, they will flood. Isn't it verified? Is it true that there is still a flood after eating virgins? If it can't be verified every year, no one will doubt it?

There is only one explanation, that is, these myths and stories of the flood will be circulated after verification. In the year when the virgins were not eaten, there was a flood. In the second year they ate virgins and virgins, but there was no flood. That's right, that's why it will continue to be passed down.

We now see that what feels like it's just a coincidence and it's ridiculous, and then it can be explained by a whole bunch of scientific theories. However, the correctness of scientific theories that we believe to be correct still comes from verification.

In essence, it is no different from the myth of the flood. The only difference, perhaps, is that the content of the verification has changed. Changed the water monster to a river flow or a rainstorm or a collapsed house or something.,And then it was found to be verified.。

Changed the content and continued brainwashing.