100% certainty is often Illogical

Post Reply New Topic

There will never be any new evidence that says 4+4 equal anything but an 8. Thus 4+4=8 is 100% correct.

Most of you people are confusing measurement error (which is inevitable) with the ability of science to determine truth (it can). While one experiment does not lead to acceptance of an idea as true, repeated experiments can lead to the establishment of facts and relationships as true.

There is no doubt that CO2 in the air increases the retention of heat. Simple physics. There is no doubt that burning fossil fuel has dramatically increased CO2 in the air. It has.

There may be some uncertainty as to how much of the apparent warming in the past 200 years is from human causes vs other sources. There is more uncertainty in predicting future warming. But the scientific community isn't playing sophomoric word games about 100.00000% certainty. They accept the idea of human caused atmospheric warming as real. It is. Just like the fact that smoking causes cancer and emphysema.

Iam 100% certain that I am not dead.

Arithmetic and positional number systems are abstracts and therefore are designed to work according to our understanding of them.

That seems to be the case, those are made according to human perception, although I think many scientists say those are universal.

Ah, and where is the peer reviewed study that proves such? Did you test for statistical significance at the .05 level? Because even if you set alpha to .05, it means that we would expect you to falsely conclude that you were alive (when in fact you are not) 5 times out of 100. Which is not so likely yet very possible. Did you include a placebo control and double-blinding? Hah! I thought not. We cannot assume that Anubis was alive with 100% certainty. We cannot assume anything with 100% certainty! The truth is a unicorn. The unicorn is eating my tomatoes. Or it isn't. I'm not sure any more.

</sarcasm off>
</pseudoscientific attempts to destroy all knowledge off>

what is?

You could say the same about anything.
I'm afraid you simply don't seem to have
enough understanding of math to even
TRY to make this point. But, 'tis a failure
to do so. Math is a HUMAN construct.

Indeed, individuation may be. There may
only be the number one. Or not.

I've noticed that the surest people tend to be the wrongest.

I cannot say I have the best understanding of algebra. But addition is something that I feel I would have reinvented if it wasn't already created. IF I was to except that mobile phone use radio waves, it would be a faith driven belief because I don't understand how mobiles work. It is not the same logic I apply to knowing that 4+4=8.

The simplest explanations are NOT
always the best or correct ones however.

Our natural tendency to individuate, WHEN
underlying reality doesn't seem to do so,
is an indication that the natural numbers
are merely an artifact of our perception.

you should read up on popper (at least) for some basic understanding of scientific theory.

you first are speaking of "acceptance as true" - which can indeed be done by science, but doesnt have anything to do with truth. then, by the next sentence, you magically jumped to "establishment of facts and relationships as true" - indicating ontological truth. im sorry, that is something science does at no point even remotely tackle.

Yes, I've always been concered about those possessed by certainty.

i agree with this threads title

Are we talking about the science of truth. In this case, to get closer to the truth, we need to understand; Truth is compromised by hatred, greed and fear. We also must acknowledge that one of the reasons why aspies are honest is because this level of honesty is required by science.

I think truth is more philosophical than scientific, and I thought the reason aspies were honest when others are not is because it doesn't occur to us to be otherwise.