A Proposition

[Sam_Spade]

Greetings all,

I have a simple proposition.

One can only be reasonably certain that a claim has tentative truth based on the empirical evidence as well as scrutinized and critiqued fact.

Please discuss.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

[bkadoctaj]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings all,

I have a simple proposition.

One can only be reasonably certain that a claim has tentative truth based on the empirical evidence as well as scrutinized and critiqued fact.

Please discuss.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Who perceives and gives the energy for the search for empirical evidence? Who scrutinizes the scrutinization?

[Sam_Spade]

Originally Posted by bkadoctaj

Who perceives and gives the energy for the search for empirical evidence? Who scrutinizes the scrutinization?

Greetings bkadoctaj,

Individuals - who else?

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

[bkadoctaj]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings bkadoctaj,

Individuals - who else?

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Individuals within what theoretical construct? In a vacuum?

[Sam_Spade]

Originally Posted by bkadoctaj

Individuals within what theoretical construct? In a vacuum?

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

Within society, some form of interconnected social relationship in which to exchange the essential information.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

[bkadoctaj]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

Within society, some form of interconnected social relationship in which to exchange the essential information.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Greetings.

I guess asking you to define each word you used in your OP wouldn't affect the scope of your question? Specifically "reasonably" and "certain".

[Sam_Spade]

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

Ah, so we come down to semantics? The proposition was intentionally constructed to be flexible. Reasonable would suggest a high level of certainty. I hope that we would both be aware that no claim can ever be 100%, that is the nature of human knowledge. We can only approach increasing percentages of certainty based upon logical consistency and available evidence.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

[Phaedrus]

Sam, are you asking how does society scrutinize science?

[ArtemisRain]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings all,

I have a simple proposition.

One can only be reasonably certain that a claim has tentative truth based on the empirical evidence as well as scrutinized and critiqued fact.

Please discuss.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Let me simplify your thread....

"I have a proposition.

One can be certain that a claim has truth based on the evidence as well as fact."

That isn't a proposition, it's a statement.

QED

Yours Truely,

Artemis_Rain

[smokedank4life]

the OP gives me a creepy as fuck feeling reading his posts and shit, i dunno its probably me

[bkadoctaj]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

Ah, so we come down to semantics? The proposition was intentionally constructed to be flexible. Reasonable would suggest a high level of certainty. I hope that we would both be aware that no claim can ever be 100%, that is the nature of human knowledge. We can only approach increasing percentages of certainty based upon logical consistency and available evidence.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

You talk about percentages as if they are inherent in nature. As if they could exist outside of human beings. And certainty (or more scientifically, accuracy) is not precision. Precision is possibly what empirical and experimental research can demonstrate or allude to. Not accuracy, because we all understand that that is an absolute, and yet do humans truly understand what an absolute is, other than as a figment of their imagination.

[ArtemisRain]

Originally Posted by Sam_Spade

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

Ah, so we come down to semantics? The proposition was intentionally constructed to be flexible. Reasonable would suggest a high level of certainty. I hope that we would both be aware that no claim can ever be 100%, that is the nature of human knowledge. We can only approach increasing percentages of certainty based upon logical consistency and available evidence.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Simplified:

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

So we come to semantics? The proposition was made to be flexible. Reason is highly certain. We can only approach certainty based upon consistent evidence.

Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

Look, all he is saying is that a claim is judged by the evidence being used to back it up.

[Sam_Spade]

Greetings ArtemisRain,

A proposition and a statement are not contradictions. A proposition is in fact a type of statement. I will provide the definitions of each word from Merriam-Webster.

Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster Online

prop·o·si·tion: something offered for consideration or acceptance

Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster Online

state·ment: a single declaration or remark

Therefore what I am providing is a declaration meant for your consideration.


--------------------------------------------

Greetings Phaedrus,

No, but that is not what I am asking. I am not asking anything, just suggesting a proposition for discussion.

--------------------------------------------

Greetings again bkadoctaj,

I more or less concur, it's just a matter of perspective, and I don't think the content of my reponse was lost on your at all. For example, a mathematician of statistician may very well suggest that probability is very inherent to nature. If not it is at least applicable to the observed phenomena of nature.

But I digress, let us not get too messy with semantics, because I do indeed think we're on the same page... or so it would seem.



Yours Truly,
Sam_Spade

[ArtemisRain]

A statement is used to inform. A proposition is used to suggest something. Your thread topic was in the form of a statement.

[g0pher]

Originally Posted by smokedank4life

the OP gives me a creepy as fuck feeling reading his posts and shit, i dunno its probably me

HAHA! Word my Br0ther !