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
    Some can, some do. Some will talk about it, some won't talk about it, and then some others are very selective in who they talk to about it. Judging your current questions based on your postings in other threads, I have a feeling that the questions you currently ask are just baited questions. Questions whose answers will be used as a launching pad for ridicule. I have pointed out the instructions many times on this forum, provided the scripture to support my views, and all that is ever given back is ridicule. So if you want to know the answers, they are in this forum in various other threads.
     
  2. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course there is ridicule when someone makes the claims that they "know God personally" and that God has daily conversations with them and that they "know the truth of scripture" from these daily conversations ..

    .. but that person refuses to give answers to a few simple questions about scripture.

    If you know the "the truth of scripture" directly from God then why will you not answer simple questions?
     
  3. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Granny says a fact...

    ... is a truthism.
    8)
     
  4. stig42

    stig42 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,237
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You have a good feeling there

    i may ridicule to much but that’s not the point it’s a very important thing if god exist or not and what the like if they exist so if someone tells me they know ii do feel compelled to see if there’s any problem i can fined with how they claim to know

    i do get rather hostile about it I think I should consider trying to do something about that though it won’t be easy ad I have ab ad track record with things I should do that re also hard to be sure
     
  5. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Then you understand my reluctance toward spelling it all out again.
     
  6. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I question that definition. There's a man in a psych ward now who firmly believes it's 1945. If we rely on your definition, then it truly and really is 1945 today. The only way I can reconcile your definition is if it meant to describe facts as subjective -- for example it might be a fact to the man in the psych ward that it's 1945 but not a fact for the rest of us.

    Here's how Webster defines fact:

    fact noun \ˈfakt\
    Definition of FACT

    1: a thing done: as a obsolete : feat b : crime <accessory after the fact> c archaic : action
    2 archaic : performance, doing
    3: the quality of being actual : actuality <a question of fact hinges on evidence>
    4a : something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
    5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality ​

    I encourage you to rely on Webster or other more established sources rather than "thefreedictionary.com" for a reliable definition. TFD.com doesn't seem as credible.

    However, I find the word 'fact' to be problematic and suggest folks use terms like observation, measurement, or perhaps conclusion to more clearly characterize the basis they are presenting as 'facts.' The problem I find with the word fact is folks often label something as factual but later find that they are mistaken and it differs greatly from reality. Maybe this type of mistaken labeling of something as a fact is what the TFD.com definition is trying to express.
     
  7. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Aren't all things (images, thoughts) occurring in the mind, subjective?

    You mean as credible as definition #5 in your preferred example? OK.

    Maybe your example definition #5 is also another example of that 'mistaken labeling'.
     
  8. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63

    Not sure how that applies. Maybe because one man may hold things to be factual that another doesn't?




    Regarding definition #5, I think Webster is saying that not only is the length of a piece of paper a fact, but the expression of that length (the statement "this paper is 8.5" long") is also a fact because the information is presented as being based on objective reality.

    But you might be right. As I said, there is a problem with the word fact. It was once held as fact that the world was flat. People had confidence in the statement, because it was presented as fact. But it later turned out that this fact did not, and had never, truly described the reality of our globe. I would trust Webster more to address subtle distinction between what we hold to be objective reality and what is real. At least more than I would rely on TFD.com.

    In either case though, I don't think this gives license to make the claim that things become real simply because we believe them. Children often become convinced there are monsters under their bed, their belief does not mean it's a fact that monsters live under beds.
     
  9. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Now that is truly a rationalization. Let us examine "subjective":

    "sub·jec·tive (sb-jktv)
    adj.
    1.
    a. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision.
    b. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience.
    2. Moodily introspective.
    3. Existing only in the mind; illusory.
    4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind.
    5. Medicine Of, relating to, or designating a symptom or condition perceived by the patient and not by the examiner.
    6. Expressing or bringing into prominence the individuality of the artist or author.
    7. Grammar Relating to or being the nominative case.
    8. Relating to the real nature of something; essential.[/QUOTE]

    I suppose if you were limiting the definition to that which is expressed in definition number 1.b. or number 6, then it could be up to the individual. On the other hand, the main focus of most of the definitions is that of 'mind' and 'perception'.

    Objective reality as "perceived" by the individual. Perception takes place in the mind therefore, rendering that perception to be subjective.

    "what we hold"? That expression again, relates to something subjective, as those things that 'we hold' (in context to your statement... not physically hold) are things that take place in the mind and are therefore subjective.

    A statement of uncertainty is expressed in the form "I don't think..."... why use the negative 'don't' if your confidence in the opposite is absent? In which case it would have been more properly stated; "I am convinced that this does not give license..."


    Are you 100% certain that there are no "monsters under the bed"? Are you certain that there is no God? Are you certain that there are no 'spirits' wandering around?
     
  10. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    I think any reasonable person would concede that there are likely undiscovered truths in this world and that a lack of evidence that something exists is not the same as proof it does not exist.
     
  11. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    "reasonable" = "reason" + "able"

    Reason simply means "normal thinking" "able" means having the capacity to do.

    Therefore, reasonable would imply "a person capable of normal thinking".

    As for the 'lack or absence of evidence'? I concur! "An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".
     
  12. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you think a person that can not understand that the freezing point of water does not change when repeatedly measured under the same experimental conditions qualifies as a person capable of reason ?
     
  13. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    See here:
    http://www.politicalforum.com/1060916199-post578.html

    Good advice for you to follow.
     
  14. Herby

    Herby Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Incorporeal, you needn't trust anyone. I suggest that you repeatedly measure the melting point of water yourself. This is an experiment that can be done at home. All you need is some water in a container, a freezer*, and a suitable thermometer. Make sure that the container contains both ice and water when you measure the temperature. Remember to put the thermometer into the icy water long enough to get consistent results.

    Have fun checking Giftedone's claim.

    * A heater works too if you live in a region with ambient temperatures a few degrees below 0°C.
     
  15. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is far too logical and would involve reasoning. IC will stick to the claim that the freezing point of water is arbitrary because the numbers on the termperature scale were arbitrarily chosen.

    When boxed into a corner by sound reasoning otherwise .. IC will quickly turn the tables and start accusing his adversary of claiming that the freezing point of water is arbitrary.

    When the adversary points out the lie by reposting the evidence... "prove it prove it" will be the response and the adversary will be accused of lying, and being in denial.
     
  16. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I don't need a measuring stick to tell me that water is frozen. When I see that it is frozen, then I know that the weather is cold enough to warrant the use of a winter jacket. If I see the water in the trays of the freezer is frozen, then I know that I can use that frozen water to aid in cooling down other liquids and solid objects. Practical testing through observation and practical application of the results of my experiment and observation. Whatever arbitrary number is assigned to that frozen water is irrelevant. If the water is frozen, then the water is frozen.

    As for the other posters 'claim'... not to worry. That other poster has not proven any of the claims that he has made on this forum or on this thread. He is an imposter who is imposing on the subject of intelligence.
     
  17. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    If you plant an apple seed, is that seed going to produce cucumbers? The same holds true with the arbitrary numbers on the thermometers. They cannot produce anything but more arbitrary numbers.
     
  18. Someone

    Someone New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Assuming you do actually believe the bible is true and real. It's a factual statement about your belief if the statement is true. However, the statement "the bible is true and real" would be an opinion.
     
  19. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    However, the bold and underlined text is not what I said. I said that "I believe that the Bible is true and real." Big difference. My belief is not based on an opinion. . . it is based upon my personal experience in dealing with (working, using, learning from) that Bible and its contents.
     
  20. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63



    The freezing point that someone might conclude from the experiments or the individual measurements? Either may change depending on the precision and uncertainty of the experiment.
     
  21. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    Many opinions are based on personal experience. Anyway, I don't think anyone is questioning whether or not your believe something. Most are just observing that whether you believe something and whether that thing is true are different questions. The fact that you do believe it, does not make it a fact that what you believe is true.
     
  22. Someone

    Someone New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The first two sentences responded to that statement. The third sentence was about a related alternative, to provide context and clarification. Basic reading comprehension is involved in understanding that, so I am not surprised you had difficulty.
     
  23. Herby

    Herby Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    That is not true. The result depends on the temperature of the other liquids or solid objects. For example, if they're colder than the ice, they will get warmer when brought into contact with the ice.

    The interesting part are the relations in between temperature and other physical quantities. That's where the exciting stuff happens and practical questions get answered.

    What happens when salt is sprinkled on an icy road? Will it always melt the ice? Under what conditions doesn't it work anymore?

    How should a new thermal power plant be designed? Is it worth the risk to do no physics and number crunching? Who would invest millions into uninformed guesswork with a high risk of building a piece of junk?
     
  24. Incorporeal

    Incorporeal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,731
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Which part is not true? If I see the water is frozen, the water is frozen; Irregardless of what the alleged temperature of the surrounding items are. IF THE WATER IS FROZEN, THE WATER IS FROZEN.

    The water gets salty. "it" never could melt the ice, because "it" is just a word. Under what conditions does what not work anymore?

    Either on paper (unlikely) or else with the use of a CAD system.

    People do that all the time.


    The same ones who currently do the investing in such things as the Challenger which went up in a cloud of smoke and flames. The same ones that funded the construction of the bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, killing thousands and doing bodily and psychological harm to hundreds of millions more. Tax payers and of course private investors who had a vested interest in the development of such WMD's.
     
  25. kowalskil

    kowalskil New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What is a fact to me? It is that I am quoting what I am reading on the screen of this computer.

    .
     

Share This Page