Intergalactic Summit

Ontology and the philosophy of science attempt to give an accounting of and an objective accuracy to which scientific concepts refer to objective states of being, which do not, why, and what categories result.
The scientific community seems to have adopted the subjective belief that the philosophy of science is as useful to the scientist as virology is to the virus.

While the philosopher would attempt to argue objectively that virology would indeed be useful to the virus, were it capable of thoughtfully digesting the content.

The demarcation problem is the central question in ontology and the philosophy of science. The central property of any science is falsifiability (i.e. all scientific claims can be proven false, at least in principle, and if no such proof can be found despite sufficient effort then the claim is likely true).

In effect, some scientists offer statistical models of explanation which account for statistical sciences, while others suggest that the explanation is primarily motivated and achieved by unifying disparate phenomena or primarily motivated and achieved by providing the causal or mechanical histories leading up to the phenomenon (or phenomena of that type). That is, unifying principles and cause and effect in the observable spectrum.

Philosophy is distinguished from more scientific ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument, often without the underlying, individualized observations of so called empirical science.

Both methods of research attempt to establish a status quo, or general consensus about the phenomena under scrutiny.
I would propose to first gain a greater understanding of the phenomena of matter in discourse with my peers in New Eden. Seeking nothing more than a consensus in my own mind, and perhaps contributing to a consensus in others.

So, does matter exist? And into what catagories does such phenomena lend itself? For my own understanding, I see matter composed of at least five seperate stated categories and at least two sub-catagories filed under these broad descriptives.
Namely, that states of matter can be catagorized scientifically as solid, liquid, gas and plasma, with a fifth in anyons, typified by bosons and fermions. While it is further defined as organic and inorganic, or animate and inanimate.

Metaphysics would catagorize these as earth, water, air and fire, with the fifth comprising aether. Further defined as mental and physical. I look forward to your thoughts..

But really, the four states you mentioned are really just states that a a mixture of fermions and bosons take on together.

So really there are only ever two, the dark and the light, the yin and yang, life and death. And yet they come from each other and through each other. Matter into light, light into energy, energy into matter. All else is an illusion.

Organic and inorganic are artificial distinctions. All matter is conscious and part of consciousness. All else is an illusion.

von Khan speaks much truth on his forum. The God of the Amarr and the Principles of Ida have much in common, I have come to find.

Although we Intaki love freedom, democracy, a willing heart of joy openness of spirit. The Amarr value control and servitude.