100% certainty is often Illogical

Post Reply New Topic

100% certainty, I believe it is an NT thing. But NT cannot possibly be 90% sure on any subject. Take global warning. I was talking to a lady in a café her subject was environmental biology. We went on the subject of global worming and I found out she was 100% that it was man-made. I said that I cannot be 100% certain it is man made. Simply because my certainty would only faith driven, assuming the evidence is correct.

It must be the case that political oriented thinkers, mainly NTs, see things too black and white.

Going on the subject of religion, many people think that their religion is 100% the truth of the universe. And non-logical thinking atheists come to the conclusion that the world would be an instant better place 100% without religion.

Logical thinking aspies such as my self, in my infinite wisdom beyond my years, has acknowledged that X religion isn’t true because of logical deductions using the science of evolution, which I clearly understand. But what I can never be 100% is a society without faith is going to be a better one. Faith did evolve to with NTs together taking away one would be like taking bamboo from panda.

I am 100% sure that human activity since the start of the industrial revolution has significantly increased the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. I am also 100% sure that CO2 is transparent to visible light, but tends to trap heat. Which makes it easy for me to believe in the greenhouse effect with certainty.

How much will this heat things up? I don't know. Will it be a gradual, tolerable change, or an abrupt shift in states? I don't know. How much polar ice will melt, and how fast? I don't know.

There's no such thing as 100% certianty in any scientific sense. ALL "truth" is subject to verification/falsification as new facts come to light.

you're quite right... true 100% sureness is a very rare thing.

the system most comments on factual statements are made nowadays, the empirical scientific system, isnt made for factual (ontological) quality at all, yet constantly abused that way. that system is never questioned by most, and taken as ontological fact. its scientific therefore it must be a true formulation of what really is. this goes that far that first, people watch things falling, and empirically deduce a construct called gravity. later on, they use this construct to justify why things fall down. a perfect logical circle that happens when you dont think through what science is (a workable tool) and what its not (ontology or metaphysics)...

there are a few 100%s, though... given our ideas of whole and part (and thinking of wholes and parts apart from our ideas of it would be pretty senseless), you can be 100% that the whole is larger than any part of it. or 2+2=4 and the like. but basically, these statements arent about things that can be grasped empirically, they are about ideal entities like for example numbers.

Aye. And in an epistemological sense,
it gets even worse. To the point where
there seems to be nothing which qualifies
as knowledge at all.

That's not true. There's such a thing as Fuzzy Logic, where varying degrees of truth can be assigned, and certian ideas belong to certian fuzzy sets.


ARE you just trying to be a contrarian again birdie!!? :-b

That's true.

...but only 99.999% true.

I'm well aware of Fuzzy Logic. Doesn't cut to the core
though. It only handles levels of certitude, which are
still based upon axioms, assumptions - if you will.

Faith underlies all of what we believe.




I NEVER argue just for the sake of arguing.

I suppose we can't say with 100% certainty that smoking causes emphysema or cancer; we can only say that we are pretty sure that smoking causes statistics. The truth cannot be known, so do what ever you will.

lol
I believe you are 99.999% right on this.

Of course that also applies to uncertainty as well, that is, if something is not 100% true, it isn't 100% false either.

4+4=8 is scientific. It is not a faith based belief because I have good understand mathmatics.

Please explain what basis you're using, without
resorting to axioms.

No one really knows exactly what happens when we think
Therefore we can never really ever know anything - Eyedea

lol i thought you said "blink" for a sec.... and i was like, "you know, you're right!"

the world could go crazy and back every time we blink for all we know

i'll shut up and back slowly out of the thread now

Exactly! And new information is constantly becoming available. Of course, some of it is often suppressed for various political and economic reasons, but still....