Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-09-2013, 11:39 AM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 11:12 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The actuality of the physical processes is not contingent on the naming, or being observed. They worked and happened LONG before any brain saw order, and did the naming (as "facts").

That, by its very nature, is unprovable.

It just happens to be an incredibly useful assumption. It's provability doesn't particularly matter.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
06-09-2013, 11:46 AM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
I believe the physical processes left all sorts of evidence as to how they worked, before anyone was around to observe or name them.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 12:42 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 11:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I believe the physical processes left all sorts of evidence as to how they worked, before anyone was around to observe or name them.

There you are, believing stuff. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
06-09-2013, 12:58 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 12:42 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-09-2013 11:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I believe the physical processes left all sorts of evidence as to how they worked, before anyone was around to observe or name them.

There you are, believing stuff. Tongue

Goin' through my "Tao of belief" phase.
I scare myself. Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
06-09-2013, 05:11 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 09:06 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-09-2013 08:22 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  We understand it perfectly.
There is no evidence the universe works that way.
As I said, "show me the money", or shut the fuck up.

Nobody's understanding that sentence.

What we all agree on, is I&I always has agenda. Thumbsup

Bucky doesn't seem to understand that a human conception of the world using language and categorizing experiences as facts is a human action. There are no concepts without a human brain to conceptualize the external world.

He keeps reading my statements like the one above and confusing reality with the human methods of relating to reality. There are no "facts" without human minds.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 05:44 PM
Re: RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(06-09-2013 09:06 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Nobody's understanding that sentence.

What we all agree on, is I&I always has agenda. Thumbsup

Bucky doesn't seem to understand that a human conception of the world using language and categorizing experiences as facts is a human action. There are no concepts without a human brain to conceptualize the external world.

He keeps reading my statements like the one above and confusing reality with the human methods of relating to reality. There are no "facts" without human minds.

Sounds very presumptuous that humans are the only minds capable of this.

Why believe you, where's your evidence other species in the universe aren't capable of creating concepts.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 06:04 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
Ah! Let's review:

(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  ... human conception of the world using language and categorizing experiences as facts is a human action.

Premise granted.

(it is tautological anyway)
(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  ... human conception ... is a human action

...

(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are no [human?] concepts without a human brain to conceptualize the external world.
(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are no "facts" without human minds.

Trivial conclusion. Restatement of premise.


The question naturally arises: so what?

Maybe Bucky doesn't find it worth his time to address a tautology...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 08:14 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 06:04 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Ah! Let's review:

(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  ... human conception of the world using language and categorizing experiences as facts is a human action.

Premise granted.

(it is tautological anyway)
(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  ... human conception ... is a human action

...

(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are no [human?] concepts without a human brain to conceptualize the external world.
(06-09-2013 05:11 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are no "facts" without human minds.

Trivial conclusion. Restatement of premise.


The question naturally arises: so what?

Maybe Bucky doesn't find it worth his time to address a tautology...

Bucky is finding it worth his time to argue that facts (human linguistic tool of relating to the world) can exist without humans.

Unless e is trying to argue that it is possible to know the "actual" real as a human without using human methods.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 08:22 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 11:39 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That, by its very nature, is unprovable.

It just happens to be an incredibly useful assumption. It's provability doesn't particularly matter.

There is dogma and fanaticism versus reason (logic) and empiricism.

A fact is what is the case and a belief is accepting something as directly corresponding with what is the case (i.e. accept as being true).

Let's not rely on circular reasoning or question begging. You don't need to assume something as factual to simply take and accept what seems to be the case as true; it is unnecessary and dangerous, and it doesn't just apply to certain areas. There is fine line between those making certain leaps with regard to human understanding and those who might make a leap that leads to immorality and injustice, etc.

Wisdom should respected, as should rationality. I'm always uncomfortable when someone claims knowledge or facts, and think that they have figured out it all. I'd rather wisdom be challenged through a belief being held with evidence to the contrary, as opposed to the dangerous folly of the people with the facts.

Two things I don't like hearing: "That's a fact" or "________ have/has a right".

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 11:23 PM
RE: Do facts require belief for it to be a fact?
(06-09-2013 08:22 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(06-09-2013 11:39 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That, by its very nature, is unprovable.

It just happens to be an incredibly useful assumption. It's provability doesn't particularly matter.

There is dogma and fanaticism versus reason (logic) and empiricism.

A fact is what is the case and a belief is accepting something as directly corresponding with what is the case (i.e. accept as being true).

Let's not rely on circular reasoning or question begging. You don't need to assume something as factual to simply take and accept what seems to be the case as true; it is unnecessary and dangerous, and it doesn't just apply to certain areas. There is fine line between those making certain leaps with regard to human understanding and those who might make a leap that leads to immorality and injustice, etc.

Wisdom should respected, as should rationality. I'm always uncomfortable when someone claims knowledge or facts, and think that they have figured out it all. I'd rather wisdom be challenged through a belief being held with evidence to the contrary, as opposed to the dangerous folly of the people with the facts.

Two things I don't like hearing: "That's a fact" or "________ have/has a right".

There are philosophical problems with logic as well.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: