What is a fact?

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Incorporeal, Jan 7, 2012.

  1. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So now your responses turn to emotional appeals. Cute.
     
  2. Jiyuu-Freedom

    Jiyuu-Freedom Keep the peace Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    16,174
    Likes Received:
    94
    Trophy Points:
    0
    For those who choose to participate in this thread, please stay on topic and leave out the personal attacks and/or insults.

    Thank you,

    Jiyuu-Freedom
    Site Moderator
     
  3. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yes Ma'am. Your written word is good as gold.
     
  4. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The OP stated the following:

    "I believe that the Bible is true and real.

    Does the statement above constitute a fact? If 'yes', then what 'fact' is established by that statement? If 'no' then explain why the statement is not a 'fact'. "

    Later in the thread, the definition (from a secular source) was supplied and is again printed below. For the purpose of this thread, I have emphasized the definition # 2c. That definition alone does not negate the other definitions.

    The point that is being stressed, is the definition itself and the impact that the definition has on issues where that particular definition is rarely considered. It is a definition that has been obscured by volumes and volumes of daily use of the other definitions. Obviously, the definition 2c is not 'obsolete' or it would be marked as such; therefore, the definition is still as valid today as it was when it was first placed in the dictionary as a definition. The definition also has as much importance as the other definitions and is not necessarily placed in its sequential position as a matter of its rank of importance.



    "fact (fkt)
    n.
    1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; a blur of fact and fancy.
    2.
    a. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.
    b. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.
    c. Something believed to be true or real: a document laced with mistaken facts.
    3. A thing that has been done, especially a crime: an accessory before the fact.
    4. Law The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence: The jury made a finding of fact."

    It is noted that the definition stipulates "Something believed to be true or real:" That word "something", naturally can be anything conceivable. Anything from Pink Pandas to Flying Spaghetti Monsters and yes, even God or the Bible and the many 'somethings' mentioned in the Bible. Regardless of what that something is, there is the requirement that the 'something' is "believed to be real and true".

    Now, next is that magic word "believed". The following definition is found in the same source dictionary and is based on the root word "believe".

    "be·lieve (b-lv)
    v. be·lieved, be·liev·ing, be·lieves
    v.tr.
    1. To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
    2. To credit with veracity: I believe you.
    3. To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.
    v.intr.
    1. To have firm faith, especially religious faith.
    2. To have faith, confidence, or trust: I believe in your ability to solve the problem.
    3. To have confidence in the truth or value of something: We believe in free speech.
    4. To have an opinion; think: They have already left, I believe."

    Essentially believe means to have 'confidence', 'trust', 'faith' in the veracity of something or someone or some concept or some ideology, etc. There is nothing mystical in any of those terms. Those same terms are even used outside of religion as in when someone declares: "I have confidence in science", or "I have faith in science", or "I have trust in science".

    The first definition of 'believe' shows almost identical words as used in the definition 2c of the word 'fact'. This shows that the two words do compliment each other in their stated purpose or function. Allowing a continuity to exist between the words.

    Looking now at one of the negative connotations that is derived from the definition 2c of the word 'fact', is the notation placed alongside the definition. "a document laced with mistaken facts." Some people might interpret that statement to mean that all 'beliefs' are "laced with mistaken facts", but when analyzing that negative connotation, one must realize that before the 'something believed to be true and real', there must be a proof that shows the 'something believed to be true and real' to be a mistaken 'fact'.

    Notice the change in the label. Instead of speaking of 'facts' we are not confronted with "mistaken facts". Though the 'facts' are labeled as or even proven to be 'mistaken', they are still 'facts'.

    What is a "mistaken fact" or "mistaken facts"? Well, we already have the definition of 'fact' or the plural form "facts", so let us look at the word 'mistaken'.
    Again from the same source dictionary.
    "mis·tak·en (m-stkn)
    v.
    Past participle of mistake.
    adj.
    1. Wrong or incorrect in opinion, understanding, or perception.
    2. Based on error; wrong: a mistaken view of the situation."

    From that definition above, it is seen that in order to say that something is 'mistaken', there is again the need for proof to show the error, mistake, wrongness, or even the incorrectness of the 'perception', 'understanding', or the 'opinion'. Without a showing of such proof, then the opinion, understanding, or perception remains as a valid "fact".
     
  5. DarkDaimon

    DarkDaimon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,531
    Likes Received:
    1,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, I would say that it is a fact that you believe that the Bible is true and real, unless you are lying. But based on your post history, I would bet money that it was true.
     
  6. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Thank you for that acknowledgment. BTW: I am not lying.
     
  7. kilgram

    kilgram New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,179
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No. Obviously. That is just a belief. A faith.

    The bible is just a tale.

    You must provide all the proofs about the reality of the bible. And that has not been, so can not be considered more real than The Lord of the Rings.

    To something be a fact, you can't believe in that. You must know that is like you said that something is.

    PS: What is a fact is that you believe that the bible is real.
     
  8. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Do you believe in the official secular definitions of words? If so, then you have to accept the reality of the definition of the word "fact". If you cannot accept the reality of the definition of 'fact', then you are in denial of reality, and that would be a contradiction in your mind. The definition of the word 'fact' is a reality, yet you cannot accept the reality of the definition. Hmmm.

    Believing is knowing. Knowing takes place in the subjective mind, and believing takes place in the subjective mind. Do you believe what you think? Do you believe in science? Science is a non-entity. Science is subjective.

    I posed a challenge to another poster and never received an answer from him. Here is the challenge: Name one thing, anything, that is not subject to the subjective mind. I bet you can't do it. Therefore, everything has to be viewed subjectively. Now what does that say about your so-called KNOWING that something is 'real'. Even your senses are subject to the subjective mind... so truly now,,, what is 'real' and what is it to 'know' that something is 'real' when you are forced to subjectively view everything that enters your mind, regardless of how everything enters your mind?

    You claim that I must provide all the proofs about the reality of the bible, yet you seemingly don't accept the reality of the definition of the word 'fact'. Strange. Now answer me this: Why should I be required to provide the proofs that you have demanded, when you don't accept the reality offered by the definition of the word 'fact' which is found in a common dictionary?
     
  9. FreeWare

    FreeWare Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,350
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    38
    "Official secular definitions of words"??

    What's wrong with just the usage of words? Why on earth, rhetorical question, such things as "official secular definition" or "religious definition" of a word?

    The word fact is a splendid example of there not really being definitions of words, only usages. Different uses pertaining to different contexts. Both of which are all but static.

    For people accustomed to dealing with undeniable truths such as religious tenets, a fact may refer to such an undeniable truth, and for people accustomed to dealing with demonstrable reality, a fact may refer to a demonstrable occurrence. And people accustomed to both may change between different usages depending on the prevalent subject. All is relative to context.
     
    Perriquine and (deleted member) like this.
  10. kilgram

    kilgram New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,179
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How many nonsenses in three paragraphs.

    I don't believe in science. I believe in the investigation, in the proofs, in the experimentation, observation, I believe in reasoning. That is what I believe. And just I believe in the things that with experimentation, observation, proofs, have been proved to be real.

    Ah and believe is not knowing. Knowing is something that you know for sure. Believe has another meaning. Is think something, you don't know sure. You don't have proofs about that.

    Or the believe in a more metaphisical meaning that is that one in my first paragraph. That is more trust. I trust/believe in you. But that is not knowing. Is just some kind of faith.

    That I name something that is not subjective? A tea is a tea. The gravity is gravity. There is no subjective discussion. That are facts.
     
  11. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I didn't see any "nonsenses" in three paragraphs. How many are you seeing? Are they real? Do you have any proofs of those 'nonsenses'?

    All of those things that you listed, are all parts of science. So, essentially, you are admitting that you believe in science, and all of its component parts.

    "Proved"? What has science "proved"? Science cannot prove anything. That is a known fact that is admitted by the scientific community.

    So, if believing is not knowing, then you don't know if you believe or not. If you know what you believe, then you cannot be knowing, because your knowing is a belief. Can you prove that you know what you believe? Do you believe what you know?

    How do you know that you 'trust/believe' in me? If you don't know me, then how can you trust/believe me? Do you know that I am real? Or do you just believe that I am real? Have we ever met in person? No? Then how do you know that I am real enough for you to trust/believe?

    Then prove that gravity is more than just subjective. Can you even mention gravity without it being subjective before you can mention gravity? What makes a tea, tea? Where did the name for tea come from? The subjective mind? Do you believe that a tea is a tea? If you know that a tea is a tea, then how do you know that the tea is a tea? Were you told that it is a tea? Ah... so you leaned on the subjective teachings of someone else. They said to you... "hey look this is tea. I know its tea, therefore it has to be tea. If you are smart, then you will listen to me and you will also call it tea. If you don't agree with me about calling it tea, then you are not in touch with 'reality'."
     
  12. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why is it that you people are not wanting to deal with that definition of the word "fact"? Is the reality of that definition too much of a slap in the face for you to deal with? Can't you accept reality?
     
  13. kowalskil

    kowalskil New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ordinary people have no trouble with defining facts; they deal with them each day.

    Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
    .
     
  14. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Can you be a little more specific with your intended use of the word ordinary? What constitutes an 'ordinary person'?
     
  15. kilgram

    kilgram New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,179
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, science is just the study of the nature; to simplify a lot the meaning.

    LOL. Really are you asking that? Please what science has proved? Basic things like howto produce electricity. What will succeed to a body if enters in contact with different ammount of electricity. All that is proven by science.

    And all the rest of things related to science.
     
  16. FreeWare

    FreeWare Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,350
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    38
    When you ask what constitutes an 'ordinary person', what's your intention with the word 'constitute'? Also, what do you mean with the word 'what'? And what's your intention with it being a question? Come to think of it, what's my intention with the word 'question'?
     
  17. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What things, parts, characteristics, behaviors, etc., are the elements which make up an ordinary person. There now,, you satisfied or would you like to troll some more? Remember, everybody has a differing perception of everything.
     
  18. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Just as I thought. You seem to think that science is a sentient being. Science does not have the capacity to prove anything... Science don't even have the capability of thinking. Only people can attempt to prove anything.
     
  19. TheRazorEdge

    TheRazorEdge Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2011
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    I thought there was a rule against posting multiple threads with the same material? We've got the 'religious meaning of evidence' thread, the 'what is truth' thread and now the 'what is fact' one. All posted by the same person, nearly identical in purpose and with nearly the same results in each one of people being driven to bickering needlessly because of the manipulations of the thread author.

    Let's test the OP and the author of it with a statement that matches the one in the OP.

    I believe the Bible is bunk.

    I am being completely honest with that statement.

    Is it a fact, Incorporeal?

    If that is a fact, does that now mean that it is a fact that the Bible is bunk?
     
  20. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    To you, that is exactly what it means. Because you have stipulated that it is a fact. That is a strange 'fact' for an ordained minister to admit to. Congratulations!

    As for the similar threads issue. They all deal with different subject matter.
     
  21. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe every word of the Bible contains truth. I do not focus on facts and I have no need to prove the Bible.

    If one tries to prove things of faith as fact they may fail. Ever since these ultra right fundies came along the message has been pushed aside in search of things that are not.

    I mean a prime example is the creationist Museum. Come on that is a load and a big one at that. Faith is the issue and when one passes speculation, conjecture and lies off as fact they are no longer pushing faith.

    I have speculated many times but I leave things open I would not push a guess as a fact.
     
  22. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Good post Archer. I admire your position on the subject. Also, just as a reminder, the subject is not 'faith' but rather 'fact". Also, I have used factual definition of the word 'fact',,, not guess work. But thanks for your honesty and dedication to a cause and manner of thinking that you deem appropriate.
     
  23. Archer0915

    Archer0915 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,412
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are correct so let me answer directly:

    It does constitute a fact. It is the fact that you have faith and see the truth in the philosophies of the Bible.

    You state: "I believe that the Bible is true and real."

    If you say you believe it is true then it is factual that you believe it is true.

    Is it real? Well I have several and I can put my hands on them so they are real in that respect.

    Is it real an a sense of being a work of historical fact? I personally do not believe so but I do believe it is a book of human truths and it is a way to get closer to the true design of the human animal.
     
    Perriquine and (deleted member) like this.
  24. CanadianEye

    CanadianEye Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,086
    Likes Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yes. It constitutes a fact. The fact established is your belief.
     
  25. TheRazorEdge

    TheRazorEdge Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2011
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    I am not an ordained minister nor do I have to be to make that statement. As for the threads having different subject matter, you might be able to get a pass with the 'religious meaning' one being a small degree different than the other two, but 'what is truth' and 'what is fact' don't appear to be the slightest bit different at all. They're both semantics arguments over words that are interchangable. Where's the difference?

    Now, just for sake of clarification, are you saying you agree that the Bible is bunk or are you saying everyone is entitled to their own facts?
     

Share This Page