Fact, Fiction and the Gray (do "Facts" actually exist?)
As seemingly important to life as they are, "TRUTH"/"FACTS" are absolutely subjective to me and my life and what is for me a "FACT."
I know this goes against the norm, the standard of our modern as well as it would be to an archaic life, but that doesn't make it "wrong" or any less of FACT to me.
Now, to say statically something is mostly factual, then you are approaching the validity of even a "statistical fact's" validity is only a representation of the size and completeness of the data-set utilized and how those data points are used to come up with an Educated conclusion.
2 + 2 = 4 seems pretty factual and concrete but you need to ensure the intelligence of your question posed. 2 camels plus 2 camels equals 4 camels, but if one is pregnant or the 2 added completes the process needed to enact a pregnancy than 2 + 2 could well equal a million camels. If one has a malady unobserved, 4 can become 3 in an instance. Or zero if a rock falls from space obliterates them and you. There is not black and white there is only gray and fluidity.
This is why "42" is the answer to the life, universe and everything. It is 100% correct for a question when observed, but if you don't know what question to ask you absolutely will see it as 100% false or crazy.
I have tried to keep this very short and sweet because I very much want to find what you think in your conglomeration of facts that got you here and now.
Can you please give me one example of a "FACT" that you feel is irrefutable? I have been racking my couple pound soft, gooey mess I use to figure answers, I simply am thus far unable. I may well be asking the wrong question.
Good luck out there
Robert Peters
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
@wgusapukc Can you please give me one example of a "FACT" that you feel is irrefutable?
I am.
Algebe,
How would we know that with certainty? Maybe we're subject to a systematic hallucination! You can make you case highly compelling, but how do you squeeze the last iota of doubt out? Keep in mind that we are not talking about subjective truths. You can know your own awareness but we can't, not with 100% certainty.
Well spoken Greensnake,
Thank you from your views.
@Greensnake: How would we know that with certainty?
The question addressed to me asked for "one example of a "FACT" that you feel is irrefutable?" I feel that my existence is an irrefutable fact. So whether or not anybody else can know that fact is irrelevant to the question.
Excellent point Algebe,
But you only "are" because you perceive yourself as "being".
But before you replied, in my World of facts, you didn't exist unless I can observe the possibility of your existence as a "fact".
Added to this you believing yourself as "being" only relates the "facts" you follow to come to that conclusion. If you were raised to believe you were only part of the hive mind your existence would be negated.
Added to this is the concept of reality. If tomorrow your pod malfunctions or you took the wrong colored pill the reality of who you are and whether you "are" will immediately change.
Excellent, Well asked. Counter argument???
Good luck out there
@wgusapukc:
Read your original question again.
Even a person in a "hive mind" or Matrix, regardless of which color pill they swallowed, would feel that their existence is an irrefutable fact. That's what you asked.
Whether they would know it is another issue that's not part of your original question. Whether you or any other person can observe my perception of my own existence is irrelevant, since that's not what you asked.
You need to be more precise in your language. Why are you now talking about knowledge rather than perceptions?
wgusapukc,
When you say 2+2=4 you are making a statement about some system or systems of mathematics. Branches of mathematics are built on sets of axioms that are givens. Like the rules for chess, they are neither true nor false. You simply start with them if you want to play chess. If you want to play checkers, you start with the axioms for checkers. Beginning with such a foundations, deductive logic can show you that 2+2=4 with 100% certainty. Whether it is mathematics, chess, or checkers, a system of logic based on axioms has no connection with reality. We may use physical pieces and a physical board to play chess, but the essence of chess is in the abstract rules and those rules are not affected by the kinds of physical props used.
When you talk about 2 camels + 2 camels you are providing a mathematical model for some aspect of physical reality. How well that model works depends on how well the axioms of that system match the physical reality. If pregnant camels are in the loop, then your model is inadequate and we should not be surprised to discover that 2 camels + 2 camels might turn out to be 5 camels. But this does not invalidate the mathematics which knows nothing of camels, let along pregnant camels. We can never be sure that reality perfectly matches any mathematical model, but we can gain a high degree of confidence in what good models are via numerous experiments by many people.
Since there are loopholes in any conclusion someone presents about the real world, facts about the real world must also be less than 100% certain. (Ever watch the Matrix?) However, if certain observations (for example the temperature that a certain grade of iron melts at) consistently matches numerous observations by competent observers in various locations, given appropriate conditions, and over the years, then it's customary to call it a "fact." For instance, we can cite the value of the density of gold as a fact. If we found its density with competent methods and tools, we could bet the farm that the value would fall within a certain narrow range. It would be a good bet given the previous work done. To call such facts "gray" is meaningless since there is no higher category of facts about the real world.
Great Greensnake,
This is the reason I am posting this. I simply can't find anything that could be anything other than subjective. Even the most exhaustivly evaluated concepts all have the possiblity that either the proof simply isn't evident in the factors leading to the fact or all possibilities werent taken into account.
Thanks,
Good luck out there
wgusapukc,
A "subjective" fact refers to a claim that largely comes from within, meaning that there is no universal yardstick to properly measure it. You may think sky-blue is the prettiest color whereas another may opt for brick red. A third fellow may opt for grass green. There is no yardstick that can settle the matter.
An "objective" fact refers to a public claim on which all competent observers can, in principle, agree. "Objective" doesn't mean "certain." Objective facts are such that it is perverse to continue examining them as though they might reasonably be wrong. At some point we accept it as a fact that the world's shape is very close to a sphere. Being good philosophers, we don't claim 100% certainty, but neither are we so delusional as to hold out for a flat earth on the basis that it "might" be true.
The fact that we are not 100% certain about reality doesn't mean that claims are all equal. Some stand so high as to deserve the label "fact." If you want 100% certainty, you will have to stick with math, chess, checkers, or other systems of pure logic. Unfortunately, such systems have no logical connection to the real world. You can't start with one and use it to know anything about the real world. The fact that mathematics is so useful is because we chose those branches of math (by selecting the axioms) to fit our ideal vision of reality. Thus, we made use of our actual observations of reality to select those logical systems that work quite well. If we knew nothing of reality, we would have no way of knowing which branches of mathematics to choose!
Yes I agree well spoken,
I see you somewhat understand what I am saying but you didn't answer the question. "tell me a FACT". or are as eluded to, if I get what you are saying "there are facts because we need to keep people from questioning things?"
I am so hopeful I got your statement very wrong.
Thanks,
Good luck out there
wgusapukc,
Here are 3 facts for you. The density of gold is greater than the density of iron. The density of osmium is 22.59 (two significant digits assumed). The westernmost part of South American is east of Louisiana judging by their longitudes.
Calling these statements "facts" is not an attempt to keep people from questioning them. But it would be a waste of time to continue debating them with die-hard fanatics. At some point we just say that the Earth is round and ignore the flat-earthers. At some point we just say that biological evolution is a fact and ignore the creationists. Nobody gets arrested for trying to argue against a fact. They just get ignored unless they have a really, really good argument. It is a waste of time to continually debate facts.
@wgusapukc
I recommend you study some zen.
You are merely parroting ( and not as succinctly) the basic zen philosophy on the transient nature of reality and the individual's perceptions of truth.
Great Old man shouts,
I have studied the principles of many belief and scientific systems, do I know all the possibilities or considered facts of all of them absolutely not.
Please, you live by facts that create everything you know are facts as we all do. In my life I can't find any, again please, tell me what keeps you wanting to take your next breath. Give me one solid fact.
Thanks
Good luck out there
@wgusapukc
"I have studied the principles of many belief and scientific systems, do I know all the possibilities or considered facts of all of them absolutely not."
I have no idea what prompted that post in reply to my recommendation that you study some Zen as you are (poorly) and in a verbose manner saying what has already been said.
I'm not interested nor curious as to what you have or may have studied. I made a recommendation that would possibly save you some angst, ridicule and effort.
Great Old man shouts...
I am on an "Atheist" forum, asking a philosophical question to people I see as possible peers, obviously so baffling to you that you recommend I study the "wisdom" of a fucking religion?
I don't know how you got here but if you believe that I came to the profound conclusion that "there is no god" leading me to the point of questioning the reality of FACT without going the zen route you underestimate the gravity of my question to me and absolutely have been nothing but demeaning to me.
Please, again, give me a freakin FACT and not an idea that will lead me away from such questions "elegantly" or other wise stated.
Please you have facts that led to telling me in my hour of darkness to seek enlightenment in a belief. 1 fact, that is all I ask.
wgusapukc: Are there any facts in your arguments? Such as "I am on an atheist forum". Or can we disregard everything you are writing as nonfactual?
Great question chimp 3,
Where I currently am, in my loop, your answer quickly leads me towards that it isn't a fact.
I would like to confirm this by the statement of another person on an "atheist forum" stated I needed to study Zen Buddhism.
Please if you can help me towards ending my Philosophical dilemma I would really appreciate that.
Thank you,
Good luck out there
@wgusapukc : "There is not black and white there is only gray and fluidity."
Is that a fact?
You are fucking funny, Excellent, confirmation!!!
Thanks
Except within the "chaos theory" it shows that in perceived chaos there can be a perceived pattern, leading me to see that a fact that there is only gray can ultimately be subjective.
My feedback loop is really going crazy, my cerebral hamster is not "ok"
Thanks for the levity chimp 3
I was not being funny. I was asking you if your statement about fluidity is a fact. Is it?
@ wgusapukc
"I am on an "Atheist" forum, asking a philosophical question to people I see as possible peers, obviously so baffling to you that you recommend I study the "wisdom" of a fucking religion?"
No, it is not 'baffling ' to me, and, no, zen pholiosophy is not a 'religion" which shows that maybe you should take my gentle recommendation of looking up and studying that philosophy as you seem to have a great deal of difficulty in expressing yourself in a succinct and cogent manner.
Your own philosophy seems to mirror many of the zen principles. You express them in a juvenile and shallow manner.
And, I "arrived" here because I wanted to be here. I am an atheist. I have been an atheist since I was in my thirties. When I arrived here I found like minded people who enjoy a debate and take neither offense nor reply with idiocy unless well deserved.
"Please you have facts that led to telling me in my hour of darkness to seek enlightenment in a belief. 1 fact, that is all I ask."
No idea what this grammatical jungle means, but I think you are asking me something I did not offer.
I only recommended a place to seek a little bit of guidance and where to find the roots of the same philosophy you seem to be expressing.
It's not compulsory.
(edited"its not")
Thank you for continuing my search.
The fact you believe "Zen Buddhism" isn't a religion (an answer to the perceived questions of life) then your "fact" seemingly so strong you stand on it truly isn't even a fact to me. Philosophy is only a perceived scientific study of what people believe, saying I am a Zen Buddhist or even an atheist shows the propensity towards it being viewed as a religion.
As for succinctness, because you still haven't attempted to answer my obviously unclear question.
"FACT exist or doesn't?"
As for my perceived inability to communicate my question you seem so unable to grasp I would like to recommend you looking into your own life with a Zen religious view and try to figure out "why am I attacking a Human, just like me, seeking an answer by trying to make myself feel better in the process?"
You threw the first blow in your perceived war with me, any thing I have stated since is a result to you trying to make me less than you "believe" yourself to be. Your attack at me fits the "well deserved" box you tout in your statement. Please use the facts that make you feel better than me and give me ONE that disproves my premise eloquently stated in your high regards of the Zen Buddhism RELIGION, religious doctrine.
And to finish, to search my grammar or punctuation to try and see me as unequal to you because you can't answer a simple question only shows me that you are not an athiest, you absolutely are a thiest the god of your own religion where instead of trying to assist those in deed you attack grammar or punctuation as I defend myself from your repeated attacks.
To say that I am in any way shape or form different from you or that you are better which you obviously see a need in your fucked up set of FACTS to try and do by feebly put me down, all that shows is that you have learned absolutely nothing in your life. Your attempted attacks, I might add making you a bully (you piece of shit) can only be perceived as a fact that you are stupid.
Thank you, you have solved my dilemma, you have shown me FACT
"Old man shouts IS an idiot."
Try to learn from your stupid mistakes.
@ wgusapukc
Take a couple of becs and lie down a while.
I didn't 'attack you". I can't be shagged to bother with you, if you can not take well meaning comment in the spirit in which it was intended.
As you were. Continue your 'search'. I shall not bother interceding with you again.
(edited for grammar and anger)
@wgus
Uh, dude, maybe you need to cut back on the coffee a little? Or lay off the energy shots? Old Man wasn't attacking you or trying to "put you down". He was trying to offer sincere advice. Sheesh. Chill a little.
"you seem to have a great deal of difficulty in expressing yourself in a succinct and cogent manner."
Now that is a fact....
@wgusapukc: Here is an instance where you cited facts to bolster your argument:
"But the fact that even the figure of authority in our society needs to be armed is exactly what I am talking about. If there weren't so freakin many weapons floating around there would be no perceived need to arm the police, some yes, all no freakin way. People with mental disorders, un-diagnosed or not, temporary or not who are, because of guns causing harm and perceived harm we have no freedom of movement, going to school, work, anywhere including staying at home hoping for safety where there is none"
Hello again chimp 3,
Excellent, the quandary I am facing is part of "Liberty, Freedom and being "ok""
That stated FACT is totally relative and subjective.
I was trying to show how perceived facts actually are contra to such important needs and "Rights of Man".
Thank you very much,
Good luck out there
@wgusapukc:
So, facts can be relative and subjective. Is that a fact?
Fact
NOUN
1 thing that is known or proved to be true.
subjective
adjective
1. based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
Theists know that they have zero objective evidence for their superstitious beliefs, so they misrepresent things like facts and objective as being defined as absolutes, it's nonsense of course.
The irony is they'll be claiming their religion has objective morality in the very next breath based on naught but bronze and iron age hearsay.
You are talking about perspective. Yes, facts are fluid and dynamic...THAT IS A IRREFUTABLE FACT! But in your example 2 camels + 2 camels ARE indeed 4 camels given the facts that one works with. Now if you interject variables then the conclusion can be and is quite different. At the onset, you did not disclose if a camel was pregnant or that LATER a meter would crash and destroy them. Those are variables AFTER the fact.
So let's be clear when someone states a fact they are indeed STATING a fact (if substantiated) and the rest is SPIN to after the fact.
Pages