+11

In every controversy, both sides think that their position is right and both think that they alone know the truth. I conclude that there is no right and no wrong. I conclude that the truth cannot be known. Neither side is 100% correct nor is either 100% wrong.

Image for post In every controversy, both sides think that their position is right and both think that they alone know the truth.  I conclude that there is no right and no wrong.  I conclude that the truth cannot be known.  Neither side is 100% correct nor is either 100% wrong.
65%Agree35%Disagree
VicZincs avatar
Share
13 146
This user has deactivated their account.
@2657260

Thanks, let me know when you find the truth on any matter, I've been searching for a long time and would like to cross that one off my bucket list.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657349

I can get all philosophical on this, but I won't go there unless you desire me to.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657356

your comment, Will,
is on the mark
within our hearts to keep

'cuz few of us
if truth be told
are really piled that deep biggrin smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657866

No doubt about it. hehe smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657828

That's a good point. It comes down to your definition of truth.

Often the lesson is: don't touch the stove because it is hot. As we know, the stove is not always hot, it is sometimes and can burn and is sometimes safe to touch.

Does a hot stove always burn? My dad was a chef, he could grab a hot pan off the stove that would raise welts on a lesser cook's hands. No a hot stove does not always burn.

Are rules a good idea? Of course.
Should we play the odds - e.g., not jump off 10 story buildings because we will likely get hurt; not touch a hot pan handle because we will likely get burned? Of course!

We absolutely should assume that the sun will come up tomorrow, it probably will. The chance that it won't in minuscule.

Is it true that the sun will come up tomorrow? Is it true that if I jump off a 10 story building I will die? I say "No!" It is not true. We simply cannot know. We cannot predict the future.

There is no possibility that we, as humans, can be 100% sure of the outcome of any situation.

Do I live my life as if I was 100% sure? You bet your ass I do. Am I 100% certain about anything? No. No I am not, and neither is anyone else.

@VicZinc That's a good point. It comes down to your definition of truth. Often the lesson is: don't touch the stove...

Your point is poorly taken, Vic. You cite 100% to only three significant figures, when you really mean 100.00000000000... etc. %.

But what if I am 99.999999999999999999...% sure of an outcome? Then for all practical purposes (FAPP), the outcome is certain, because I would have to wait longer than the age of the Universe to expect to see an exception to my expectation. (sounds like a Gilbert and Sullivan song)

Yet you, for reasons known best to yourself (if that), prefer to dwell on your philosophical fapping. biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell Your point is poorly taken, Vic. You cite 100% to only three significant figures, when you really mean...

Likewise - you, in your interesting philosophical approach to reality, seek to ignore the obvious in some masturbatory effort to self-inflate your ego. Why? Perhaps so you can run around to all your sheep like followers repeating your narcissistic chant: "I am right! I am right! Look at me, I am the correct one."

If you choose to think that 6-sigma is the same as perfect who am I to dissuade you from that fantasy?

@VicZinc Likewise - you, in your interesting philosophical approach to reality, seek to ignore the obvious in some...

I'm not talking about 6-sigma, Vic.

How about 100 or 1000 or 109-sigma? According to you, we can't rule those out, you know. biggrin smilie

@VicZinc No. according to me, WE (as humans) cannot measure that detail.

Of course we could, if, for example, half the molecules in the Earth's atmosphere suddenly by chance all started moving in the same direction at thermal velocities for 10 seconds, and the other half moved in the opposite direction. Of course we would all be dead long before the 10 seconds was over.

Climate change of a different order? biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell Of course we could, if, for example, half the molecules in the Earth's atmosphere suddenly by chance all started...

There you go again. I can make predictions to, but that doesn't equal "truth". We don't know. Someone might survive. Probably not but we cannot know until it happens.

@VicZinc There you go again. I can make predictions to, but that doesn't equal "truth". We don't know. Someone might...

There you go again, dodging the elementary blunder that you made ("WE (as humans) cannot measure that detail") and when I gave you an easily (nay, catastrophically) measurable example of such an unlikely event you duck and try to pretend that someone could survive that event. Yeah, ok, maybe one chance in 1080, again not something you would expect to see in repeated trials during the lifetime of the Universe.

And even by your niggling philosophy, it would STILL be the "truth" that the odds against surviving would be astronomically large. biggrin smilie
Image in content

@Thinkerbell You're still dodging, Vic.

Roflmao. You are out of your league.

@VicZinc Roflmao. You are out of your league.

STILL trying to laugh off your blunder, Vic? biggrin smilie

("WE (as humans) cannot measure that detail")

@Thinkerbell STILL trying to laugh off your blunder, Vic? ("WE (as humans) cannot measure that detail")

Repeating yourself is not the same stating the 'truth'. However it is the tactic used by those who have run out of logical arguments.

But I admit,
I am not (99.999999999999999999...%) sure of that, maybe you (Thinkerbell) can somehow measure things at a level beyond the capability of any hitherto known scientific equipment.

@VicZinc Repeating yourself is not the same stating the 'truth'. However it is the tactic used by those who have run out of...

You still haven't understood the example, thus compounding your blunder, Vic. No precise measurements are needed, just a natural occurrence of a VERY unlikely event, with DRASTIC effects.

Go back and read it again. biggrin smilie
http://www.amirite.com/814664-i...-alone/2657988

@Thinkerbell You still haven't understood the example, thus compounding your blunder, Vic. No precise measurements are needed...

I completely understand the the example you provide is a fantasy.

A false antecedent begets any true consequent.

You want to claim that "truth exists" because if elephants have wing then donuts are zebras. I think George Boole got there before you.

@VicZinc I completely understand the the example you provide is a fantasy. A false antecedent begets any true...

You didn't understand it at all if you think it's a fantasy. You bumbled it yet again, Vic.

The scenario I suggested conserves energy and momentum, so it is a possible configuration, just EXTREMELY unlikely, entirely in keeping with your absolutist sophistry. biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell You didn't understand it at all if you think it's a fantasy. You bumbled it yet again, Vic. The scenario I...

Perhaps I did, please enlighten me. I fail to see what that has to do with your alleged ability to measure phenomena beyond a half a dozen or so standard deviations?

I get that you can predict outcomes, but I submit that you cannot know the accuracy of your prediction if the outcome never occurs.

@VicZinc Perhaps I did, please enlighten me. I fail to see what that has to do with your alleged ability to measure...

I did not allege the ability to measure beyond 6-sigma.

The usual configuration of a gas is that the molecules move in all random directions with some total energy determined by the temperature, and zero total momentum. This is the average configuration, with equal numbers moving in the x, y and z directions.

Now for all the molecules of even one mole of gas (6x1023 molecules)to start moving only in the x-direction by random collisions would be roughly 1012 sigmas away from the mean configuration, highly unlikely, but not absolutely forbidden. Much larger deviation than that for the whole Earth, of course.

The macroscopic effects, however, would be enormous. If the favored x-direction ran from your right to left, you would feel the pressure in that direction nearly double, while the front/back pressure would drop to zero. Your guts would be squeezed out of your torso and your brain out of your eye sockets, easily measured phenomena, at least while you were still conscious.

@VicZinc "easily measured phenomena" Good luck measuring something that has never happened.

Exactly.

It never happened, nor will it, in the entire age of the Universe, it is so improbable. And so therefore it can be ignored.

The point is, it would not require precise measurements, contrary to your misapprehension. It would be a very unlikely phenomenon with very large effects.

Heck, with a 1012-sigma random deviation in solar radiation, the Earth would be vaporized. Do we need precise measurements of that unlikely phenomenon with such huge effects? Does anyone "need" to worry about it?
Can't absolutely rule it out, ya know. biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell Exactly. It never happened, nor will it, in the entire age of the Universe, it is so improbable. And so therefore...

Can't absolutely rule it out, ya know.

Exactly. Thank you. That's all I am saying.

Can't absolutely rule it out, ya know. Why?

Because you never know!

bye smilie

@VicZinc Can't absolutely rule it out, ya know. Exactly. Thank you. That's all I am saying. Can't absolutely rule it out...

If that's all you're saying, then what you are saying is not only impractical, it is trivial. biggrin smilie

Buh-bye. bye smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658061

You win

Image in content

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658238

There is no truth that can be known.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658263

I agree with that. There is only guesses.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658538

Yes! Everything is ambiguous

@2658538

the armchair sage
just loves to dwell
on trifles kinda small

like in the world
there's not a soul
exactly six feet tall

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658682

Yes, Brian, for sure.

Just tell Vic that he can't be absolutely sure that that 1927 Essex rusting in a field for 75 years won't start up and run like a brand-new Rolls, and that you'll let him have it for a mere $100,000. biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell Yes, Brian, for sure. Just tell Vic that he can't be absolutely sure that that 1927 Essex rusting in a field for...

Not buying it. Probability is not in my favor.

But I will be the first to suggest you try the key, you never know!.

@VicZinc Not buying it. Probability is not in my favor. But I will be the first to suggest you try the key, you never know!.

Are you ABSOLUTELY sure the probability is not in your favor?

"You never know!"
  —thus spake the Armchair Sage biggrin smilie

@VicZinc Now you're getting it.

And we can't draw a perfect circle either.

So what? biggrin smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658704

OMG, Brian, I was about to tell Vic that it is absolutely true that we cannot draw a perfect circle, but maybe I was wrong.

After all, maybe we can't be absolutely sure the the Perfect Circle piston people didn't do exactly that. biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell And we can't draw a perfect circle either. So what?

So nothing.
Just saying: probably can't be done. Changes nothing. Life goes on, progress happens.

Just saying it. "likely won't be round."

@VicZinc So nothing. Just saying: probably can't be done. Changes nothing. Life goes on, progress happens. Just saying...

"Can't be done".

ABSOLUTELY can't be done?

Hmm... sounds as if you are admitting that there IS an absolute truth after all, Vic, contrary to what you have been saying all along. biggrin smilie

@VicZinc ?

Don't play dumb, Vic. biggrin smilie

Are you claiming that it is ABSOLUTELY true that we cannot draw a perfect circle?

If so, then you are saying there IS an absolute truth.
In fact, there would be many such truths. wt smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2658997

I thank you Brian
for your thought
and for your kindly dealings

but I do fear
the armchair sage
is loath to share your feelings biggrin smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2659262

the armchair sage's
thinking skills
are less than what they oughter

I wonder if
his math degree
was purchased by mail order?

This user has deactivated their account.
@Thinkerbell

Sitting Rock and Drifting Cloud

Drifting Cloud sat on the end of a stick
Sitting Rock said, “Well that’s a neat trick!
balancing there without any support”
“Nothing to it,” came the retort

“It’s a matter of practice, it’s all in my mind
when I center my chakra my balance I find.”
Sitting Rock pondered this thought for awhile
then turning to Drifting Cloud, said with a smile

“I think there’s more to this trick then you claim
your story of chakras and centers seems lame”
then Sitting Rock gave the stick a big shove
and it fell, leaving Drifting Cloud drifting above

“So you see,” added Drifting Cloud laughing on high
“when your life is in balance you practically fly!”
“But you see,” answered Sitting Rock not too confounded
“Flying's for fools, I prefer to be grounded.”

@VicZinc Sitting Rock and Drifting Cloud Drifting Cloud sat on the end of a stick Sitting Rock said, “Well...

Then Drifting Cloud said, with the fall of the stick,
" 'Tis nothing but nonsense, concocted by Vic.
He postures and poses and publishes schtick
In doggerel form, where his meter don't click.
His skills as a poet, one notices quick,
Match only his math skills, and they're not too slick."
hehe smilie

This user has deactivated their account.
@2659724

Thank you, Brian. You're much too kind.

And life experience and common sense do indeed count the most.

Universities, for example, teem with high-IQ fools. hehe smilie

@Thinkerbell Don't play dumb, Vic. Are you claiming that it is ABSOLUTELY true that we cannot draw a perfect...

I only talk in probabilities. There are no absolutes.

Except one, you are absolutely off base on your understanding of reality.

@VicZinc I only talk in probabilities. There are no absolutes. Except one, you are absolutely off base on your...

And is the probability of our drawing a perfect circle anything other than exactly zero? If so, what is it?

And is the statement that there are no absolutes an ABSOLUTE truth? biggrin smilie

@Thinkerbell And is the probability of our drawing a perfect circle anything other than exactly zero? If so, what is it? And is...

Is it? I can't be sure.

The point is if anyone could draw a perfect circle they would not know it because they could not measure it closely enough to prove is is perfect.

The idea that you can prove me wrong by pointing out a paradox is the very reason for my conjecture.

"any sufficiently complex system is either inconsistent or incomplete"

@VicZinc Is it? I can't be sure. The point is if anyone could draw a perfect circle they would not know it because they...

"...they could not measure it closely enough to prove is is perfect."

You've only pushed your internal contradiction back a step. So, is it absolutely true that a perfectly precise measurement is impossible? (there's an easy probabilistic answer to that question, since you "only talk in probabilities".)

And if your post is merely a conjecture, you should have said so in your intro, instead of proclaiming "I conclude..." Nor should you have pontificated time after time that "there is no truth".

http://www.amirite.com/814664-i...-alone/2658256

Yep, your simple system is certainly inconsistent, and no more useful than the liar paradox. biggrin smilie

@VicZinc You win

Tell the fire walker to stand still in ONE spot on the red-hot coals continuously for one minute with unprotected feet and then I'll be impressed.

I can pass my finger through a candle flame without harm if I don't take longer than a second or so.

@Thinkerbell Significant figures, Vic, significant figures...

I am wrong 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001% on this.

Happy.

@Thinkerbell You're still dodging, Vic.

Me?
You keep admitting that nothing is 100% ( add as many zeros as you want). Yet you continue to argue some nonsense about how 'almost' is the same as 'always'.

@VicZinc Me? You keep admitting that nothing is 100% ( add as many zeros as you want). Yet you continue to argue some...

And you have admitted that there are plenty of remote possibilities that are negligible for any practical purpose. That's why you haven't jumped off the roof of the ten-story building, nor are you likely to, speaking of remote possibilities.

@VicZinc A remote possibility is still a possibility.

But not for practical purposes, if is remote enough.

You're quibbling over the difference between a closed and an open interval in mathematics. It makes no difference for any real measurement.

@Thinkerbell But not for practical purposes, if is remote enough. You're quibbling over the difference between a closed and an...

I am not quibbling over anything. You are trying to prove something that cannot be proved. You are attempting to convince me there is some absolute truth that can be known, beyond any and all doubt, by a mere human mind.

If I am not persuaded by my degree in mathematic I am unlikely to be persuaded by you.

@VicZinc I am not quibbling over anything. You are trying to prove something that cannot be proved. You are attempting to...

Of course you're quibbling. You're quibbling over things that are of no practical significance.

If we can show, for example, that the probability of half the molecules in the Earth's atmosphere all moving in the same direction is so low that the expectation of its occurrence is not even once during the whole age of the universe, then that possibility is negligible for any practical human purpose.

@Thinkerbell Of course you're quibbling. You're quibbling over things that are of no practical significance. If we can show...

Agreed. What's that got to do with right and wrong, or our (as humans) ability to know the truth on any matter?

So what if it is impractical? Practicality and epistemology are only marginally related.

@VicZinc Agreed. What's that got to do with right and wrong, or our (as humans) ability to know the truth on any...

Then for any practical purpose, it is true that we need not concern ourselves with the possibility that half the molecules in the Earth's atmosphere will move in the same direction. One less catastrophe to worry about. biggrin smilie

P.S. We live by practicalities.

@Thinkerbell Then for any practical purpose, it is true that we need not concern ourselves with the possibility that half the...

Maybe for you.

I certainly would not say that there is no person who does not feel the need to be concerned by that. There might not be anyone, but there might be.

Who am I (or you) do decide the needs of another person? Who am I (our you) to decide that your statement about human 'needs' is true/

@VicZinc Maybe for you. I certainly would not say that there is no person who does not feel the need to be...

Ok, since now you are quibbling over what the meaning of "need" is (are you from the Bill Clinton school?), I will say rational need, based on calculations that anyone with any knowledge of mathematics can do himself. I would add that anyone who has an irrational worry about this possibility is not being practical, and I did preface my statement by the phrase "practical purpose".

@Thinkerbell Ok, since now you are quibbling over what the meaning of "need" is (are you from the Bill Clinton school?), I will...

So you are quibbling over the definition of need?

As always we will never resolve this. I will not convince you that your definition of 'truth' is too practical nor will you convince me that mine is too impractical.

It is what it is. If you need a score it is currently 10 to 7 in my favor.

Truth is an absolute. There are no absolutes. That is my final stand, and I will bow out of this discuss graciously.

People like to be right and like to defend that thought, but it's very narrow headed to consider only yourself right without looking at the arguments of opposing parties, this way you can not grow as a person and remain a sourpuss that nobody likes. Some topics are either facts or delusions while other topics are subjective and have good points as well as flaws like the abortion question.

What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly.

Right up there with "Who needs oil? I ride the bus" as about the dumbest left wing statement I've ever heard, even by liberal standards, but yet it is the perfect liberal analysis. It's politically correct, non offensive, and non committal, AND, it answers or solves nothing.
It DOES, however, give the OP the illusion of being intelligent, or a deep, analytical thinker hehe smilie. It also makes the minions who agree or up vote, "feel good".

When the smoke screen clears, It all translates to : "I don't know, and I don't want to know" You see, TRUTH offends and frightens many, especially liberals. That's why most strive to avoid it.

Bookyankas avatar Bookyanka Disagree +6Reply
This user has deactivated their account.
@2657321

Agreed, but the OP in this case is a liberal.

No question that both sides are insane with hypocrisy and double standards, but the left is supposed to know better, because they claim to be intellectually evolved far beyond conservatives.

Bookyankas avatar Bookyanka Disagree +2Reply
@Budwick Spot on! Exactly right! Give that Book a, .... a book marker!

Ding Ding Ding, and we have another winner. Congratulations Mr. Wick you have just proven the OP!

@VicZinc Ding Ding Ding, and we have another winner. Congratulations Mr. Wick you have just proven the OP!

The OP statement is stupid! There is no right and wrong? That's wrong!

Even if it were right, you would still be wrong!

Sometimes it's difficult to remain focused on the topic at hand, rather than the other person. In the back of my mind I something think, "well of course you're going to say that, you're a [insert your own abstraction here]". And it usually goes downhill from there.

Ha! Yes, that does seem to be mostly true. I'll go ahead and trust my own conclusions about whether certain things are "right" or very wrong though, until and if I have reason not to. Stubbornly, with my last breath! biggrin smilie

That is ridiculous!
Because people don't agree on somethings, there is no truth?

Begin sarcastic example
I like chocolate ice cream. You like vanilla.
Well, phuck it then! We can't possibly know the truth about anything!
End sarcastic example

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657266

And, it doesn't take much to have you believe I've been 'set off'!

@Budwick That is ridiculous! Because people don't agree on somethings, there is no truth? **** Begin sarcastic example...

I can't know if you really like chocolate nor can you know if I really like vanilla.

It seems that when I taste pure vanilla I don't care for it, but I like it mixed on other things; so do I really like vanilla? I don't know.

Have you ever taste untreated chocolate, right from the bean?

Whatever, Budwick. You go ahead and 'know' on 'faith' all of the answers to your meaningless questions.

There are always two sides to every controversy, I'm always on the right side. lol

That varies on a case by case basis. Humility demands we consider the possibility we're wrong, nobody bats 1000. But in my mind, there is definitely right and wrong, the only thing lacking at times is our ability to discern it.

King Solomon: "My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding— indeed, if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding. He holds success in store for the upright, he is a shield to those whose walk is blameless, for he guards the course of the just and protects the way of his faithful ones." Proverbs 2:1-8

The path of the just is as the shining light, that shines more and more to the perfect day. But the way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble. Proverbs 4:18,19

This user has deactivated their account.
@2657830

Thank you. :)

: )

Jamess avatar James Agree +2Reply

This strongly depends on the issue. Most things do have a right or wrong answer, which is usually determined by which side can back their reasoning up with facts and logic. Do that long enough and it becomes apparent which side is correct, especially when there is an unbiased perspective as well.

Psyburs avatar Psybur Disagree +1Reply
@VicZinc Perhaps. I think history has many example of 'facts' being disproven over time.

What many think are "facts" aren't backed up by empirical and contested evidence, therefore when undeniable evidence is provided, what really is the truth becomes quite apparent.

Psyburs avatar Psybur Disagree 0Reply

It's all relative.

an armchair sage
once thought to jump
from off a lofty height

and halfway down
he smugly cried
you see? I'm still all right biggrin smilie

A rock is not not a rock. Something is what it is and not what its not. These are logical absolutes. The things that we cant agree on are the qualities we put on certain terms. But the absolutes are knowable

Carmos avatar Carmo Disagree 0Reply
@Carmo A rock is not not a rock. Something is what it is and not what its not. These are logical absolutes. The things...

Yes, but what is a rock? It is only a rock if we agree that it is. If you don't like my definition of this rock, then what is it?

@VicZinc Yes, but what is a rock? It is only a rock if we agree that it is. If you don't like my definition of this rock...

Thats what i mean. The thing is, inessence, what it is and isnt what it isnt. This is what we know. the labels are what makes things blury.

Carmos avatar Carmo Disagree 0Reply
@Carmo Thats what i mean. The thing is, inessence, what it is and isnt what it isnt. This is what we know. the labels are...

Labels are what we use to communicate. I said the truth cannot be known.

The truth might be that this rock is what it is yet I am not convinced that I can know what it is. I cannot communicate about it without labels and as you said, things get blurry.

I don't really know what I am and I certainly don't know what you are.

@VicZinc Labels are what we use to communicate. I said the truth cannot be known. The truth might be that this rock //is...

Ah... I follow you. ..but this is a paradox because How can you know that the truth cannot be known? I suppose if you believe that we cannot know, then we're safe which i guess makes it the standard position of scientists and philosophers. Our minds can only hold beliefs and not "truths"...aight i'm with you now

Carmos avatar Carmo Disagree +1Reply

So if someone is wrong because they refuse to acknowledge proven facts, there is still no truth?

@Walt_OReagun So if someone is wrong because they refuse to acknowledge proven facts, there is still no truth?

Didn't say there are no truths. I said that we cannot know the truth. It might exist but we, as humans, are not capable of comprehending the entirety of 'truth'. We might glimpse bit and pieces but the more we look, the more elusive truth becomes.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.