Vacci-Nation [CLOSED DUE TO DISRESPECTFUL, INSULTING, POLITICAL POSTS

[p1l0t]

Compared to a rarer risk of a harmful infection...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Compared to a rarer risk of a harmful infection...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

You are statistically and factually incorrect.

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

You are statistically and factually incorrect.

Depends who you are. If you look at it from a marco perspective maybe.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Depends who you are. If you look at it from a marco perspective maybe.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Doesn't alter the reality that you are statistically and factually wrong. Sometimes reality is not a function of perspective. There aren't really alternative versions of facts.

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

Doesn't alter the reality that you are statistically and factually wrong. Sometimes reality is not a function of perspective. There aren't really alternative versions of facts.

And you say I don't read...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

Doesn't alter the reality that you are statistically and factually wrong. Sometimes reality is not a function of perspective. There aren't really alternative versions of facts.

Numbers don't lie but human interpretation definitely can alter facts.

Assuming that truth, facts, and opinions each exist, I always define them as


Truth: Always true no matter what. Generally what we're using science and even philosophy to strive towards and for.


Facts: Anything that can be proven correct at any point in time. This is why facts change as we get closer to the truth but they're helpful to explain the world around us for whatever time they serve us.

Opinion: What you think about something. A subjective view of input.



So yeah, assuming there are two people looking at data, you could have alternative interpretations of that data and draw two different conclusions from the same data. Two different facts but eventually only one will move us closer to the truth.



*more random drive-by thoughts*

[Capt Spaulding]

Actually, I think that facts don't change. As you note, something is true or it is not. Different perspectives may alter our interpretation of facts, but the facts are analogous to truth. Deeply flawed as humans are, we may not understand them for, perhaps, ever - but that doesn't make them fungible.

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

Actually, I think that facts don't change. As you note, something is true or it is not. Different perspectives may alter our interpretation of facts, but the facts are analogous to truth. Deeply flawed as humans are, we may not understand them for, perhaps, ever - but that doesn't make them fungible.

Nyet, tovarish. I think of facts as something that can be proven, not something that has always been and will always be true. Very different things.


EDIT: I didn't say something is either true or it's not. I said something is either Truth, fact, or opinion. lol

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Numbers don't lie but human interpretation definitely can alter facts.

Assuming that truth, facts, and opinions each exist, I always define them as


Truth: Always true no matter what. Generally what we're using science and even philosophy to strive towards and for.


Facts: Anything that can be proven correct at any point in time. This is why facts change as we get closer to the truth but they're helpful to explain the world around us for whatever time they serve us.

Opinion: What you think about something. A subjective view of input.



So yeah, assuming there are two people looking at data, you could have alternative interpretations of that data and draw two different conclusions from the same data. Two different facts but eventually only one will move us closer to the truth.



*more random drive-by thoughts*

Actually you have two different opinions based on the same facts in your example...

Facts don't change. We create a concept of "truth" (otherwise known as theory) which seems to be consistent with the facts we know. Multiple theories may be formed because of differing opinions on how facts are connected.

Example: Stars and constellations.
Fact: Position of points of light in the sky

Truth 1: These are pictures painted by the gods
Opinion 1: the patterns of these points in the sky look like people, creatures, and items

Truth 2: These are balls of plasma light-years away, not unlike our own sun
Opinion 2: The points of light must have a physical manifestation to emit or reflect the light

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Actually you have two different opinions based on the same facts in your example...



Facts don't change. We create a concept of "truth" (otherwise known as theory) which seems to be consistent with the facts we know. Multiple theories may be formed because of differing opinions on how facts are connected.



Example: Stars and constellations.

Fact: Position of points of light in the sky



Truth 1: These are pictures painted by the gods

Opinion 1: the patterns of these points in the sky look like people, creatures, and items



Truth 2: These are balls of plasma light-years away, not unlike our own sun

Opinion 2: The points of light must have a physical manifestation to emit or reflect the light

Kind of sounds like what he was saying.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Actually you have two different opinions based on the same facts in your example...

Facts don't change. We create a concept of "truth" (otherwise known as theory) which seems to be consistent with the facts we know. Multiple theories may be formed because of differing opinions on how facts are connected.

Example: Stars and constellations.
Fact: Position of points of light in the sky

Truth 1: These are pictures painted by the gods
Opinion 1: the patterns of these points in the sky look like people, creatures, and items

Truth 2: These are balls of plasma light-years away, not unlike our own sun
Opinion 2: The points of light must have a physical manifestation to emit or reflect the light

Interpretation of ambiguous data would create differing "facts". Some idea proven by data. That's why I'm saying facts can change.

Fact: An example more like gravity effects all mass.

*particle physics enters the chat*
Fact: Gravity affects most mass over a certain size.

The truth is whatever underlying rules actually govern gravity that we haven't discovered yet.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Interpretation of ambiguous data would create differing "facts". Some idea proven by data. That's why I'm saying facts can change.

Fact: An example more like gravity effects all mass.

*particle physics enters the chat*
Fact: Gravity affects most mass over a certain size.

The truth is whatever underlying rules actually govern gravity that we haven't discovered yet.

I'm curious, are there masses of any size that are completely unaffected by gravity?

I see it this way. There are facts.

E.g. 1. Someone plunges a sword into another person's abdomen.

2. The sword severs an artery.

3. The victim dies from loss of blood.



In other words, some series of events occurred. They are real - they are facts.

Now, your perspective on those facts may potentially affect your view of what is true. Think of the Rodney King beating.

Truth is a really interesting concept. How do we know what it is? How do our biases, both explicit and implicit, affect our understanding and interpretation of the facts that, together, create it? Have you seen Akira Kurosawa's Rashoman?

If not, I can't recommend it highly enough. I taught a course on law and society and I'd sometime open and sometimes end the semester by screening it. It challenges not the existence of truth, but humans' ability to comprehend it.

For those who may not know of Kurosawa, he was a post WWII Japanese filmmaker who made a number of really important contributions to the art of cinema. A couple of his films - The Seven Samurai became The Magnificent Seven and his The Hidden Fortress later became a little known indie film called Star Wars.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Interpretation of ambiguous data would create differing "facts". Some idea proven by data. That's why I'm saying facts can change.

Fact: An example more like gravity effects all mass.

*particle physics enters the chat*
Fact: Gravity affects most mass over a certain size.

The truth is whatever underlying rules actually govern gravity that we haven't discovered yet.

No, it is a fact that we can observe the static effects of gravity (weight) and the dynamic effects of gravity (falling). Our current theory is that mass attracts other mass, which may turn out to be an incorrect deduction.

For a different opinion on the matter, Flat Earthers say there is no such thing as gravity, it's just constant upwards acceleration of the planet. Given cherry picking certain facts and ignoring others, that would also be a valid theory.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Spuds

No, it is a fact that we can observe the static effects of gravity (weight) and the dynamic effects of gravity (falling). Our current theory is that mass attracts other mass, which may turn out to be an incorrect deduction.

For a different opinion on the matter, Flat Earthers say there is no such thing as gravity, it's just constant upwards acceleration of the planet. Given cherry picking certain facts and ignoring others, that would also be a valid theory.

We must be moving rather fast at this point. Why can't we feel the wind?