Pattern Matching should replace Science

>>8969366
science for instance purports to give meaning to things to some degree. This effort is extremely stupid. Pattern matching is superior in every way to science. It gives a clearer and more accurate view of existence and is just naturally a better word and language for describing things.

Science is to humans
What
Human Voice Machine is to dogs

Dogs would need a human voice machine to speak english.
Humans would need science to properly do pattern matching.

Things that exist won't need science soon. Hence we should start phasing out science just like humans don't use human-voice machines.

>>8969366
This is utter nonsense,
Maybe learn what Science is before claiming to know what to replace it with?

>>8969373
Science seems like meatbag shit to convince one another about things. Even then it barely works most of the time and sometimes after generations die off.

Pattern matching is a far better system.

Does AlphaGo use science, strategical abstractions, or any words to abstract out it's plans? No. It just wins based on the most likely pattern that leads to victory through huge amounts of trial and error.

It is already better than any human. Why would useless garbage like Science need to be used in the future when you have vast pattern matching machines that will be better at any prediction than "science".

>>8969375
Alpha go wins within a simple defined ruleset with perfect information. What it does not do is try to do is ascertain the rules of a much more difficult game using imperfect information. Also learn what pattern matching is you fucking brainlet.

you realize that pattern matching is literally what empirical science is right?

>>8969366
That makes no god damn sense. Congratulations.

>>8969366
Correlation does not equal causation, thats why science needs the human touch to discern between these two

>ITT: semantics

>>8969366
I get what you're asking but you asked it in a retarded way so the majority of actual /sci/ users in math/science/philosophy will ignore your thread and instead all you'll get are a bunch of pop-science retards and emotional crossboarders who have likely never even set foot in a university.

>>8969366
Low-IQ thread.

>>8969366
So you are making a very badly worded argument for inductive reasoning?

>>8970560
I'm just talking about simplification to more basic elements. Science is just searching for patterns. Reproducible literally just means it's a pattern.

If you consider a 4D view with time, the things we see are literally just patterns the same as ABABABAB is a pattern watching an object "fall" is pattern. Since science is just the study of patterns there is no reason to mislead people by using a word like "science" when we already have the word pattern.

>>8969366
Taeyeon a cute.

>>8969375
There is nothing to be convinced of if there is scientific fact. Pattern matching will have it's own disputes made and settled when new trends are identified. Patterns, like scientific theory, are a mere guess supported facts. Facts which are repeated data that can be generated using the scientific method. A pattern.

'science' takes fewer characters to write, so I'm sticking with that.

>>8970344
This is what happens when you allow underage people to post.