@wildgrass saidSo if your testing your assumptions for reality to achieve reality aren’t you admitting what you are arguing against?
Logic solves all your problems. You can test faulty assumptions and if they are not tested false then we can assume they are true (until evidence is presented which contradicts that assumption). This is how we've built society.
@wildgrass saidSo when you are trying to confirm your assumptions are accurate you are not validating them against reality, you are comparing them to what exactly?
No.
@KellyJay saidThat's the wrong way to look at it. It's not confirmation, it's refutation. What is the evidence that your assumption is wrong?
So when you are trying to confirm your assumptions are accurate you are not validating them against reality, you are comparing them to what exactly?
You can see the sun rise every morning at a predictable time and then the birds start chirping. It is reasonable to assume the same thing will happen tomorrow. This keeps society moving along, set your alarm clock, go to work, do your work, go home and then the sun goes down (or rather, the earth keeps spinning). There's no information to disprove the assumption that the sun will rise tomorrow.
But, if information does present itself to you that contradicts that reality, you should be open to accepting the possibility that maybe the sun won't rise tomorrow. Until that happens, you don't need to continually retest the assumption that it will rise.
@wildgrass saidI ca tell you that when we build radios and a ISO audit occurs we must be able to show our processes are well documented. Then beyond that they audit the work how the work is performed. Then how in line are the operators following the instructions, then they look at the equipment and tools being used.
That's the wrong way to look at it. It's not confirmation, it's refutation. What is the evidence that your assumption is wrong?
You can see the sun rise every morning at a predictable time and then the birds start chirping. It is reasonable to assume the same thing will happen tomorrow. This keeps society moving along, set your alarm clock, go to work, do your work, go h ...[text shortened]... tomorrow. Until that happens, you don't need to continually retest the assumption that it will rise.
If the instructions call for a 3 inch pound torque wrench, are we using a torque wrench, how do you know it is 3 inch pounds, because the sticker indentifying it says 3 inch pounds, how do you know the sticker is correct, because it has a calibration date on it, how do you know the calibration tool was correct, because of the documentation we have for that. From cradle to grave we have to know. Beyond the audit what happens if that tool gets dropped, that can change the setting, does our processes cover that?
If your work can get away with assumptions and we think so is good enough. Back when I worked on CPU millions and picoseconds everything was carefully checked monitored calibrated. Not much wiggle room there!
You must use a known good to check if something is good, in a stable environment depending on what is being tested. If you had to validate your assumptions and reality did not matter, why bother?
I can speak from experience that what you do and see daily is not guaranteed will remain true. I was walking up a mountain in Alaska with a friend, took a step and started to fall, the tundra covered up a large hole. I caught myself so no harm, assumptions may suggest a balcony is safe, maybe they are most of the times, but if reality changes so does the truth.
@shavixmir saidWe can only do our best, but we have limitations, and we must acknowledge them. Knowing this, we should be very careful about what we trust and claim to know, especially when our assumptions can have real-world consequences. We can paint the entire world so that some lives are less than, pointing to some just to make people think the world would be better off without them, and move to make that way. That is bad for an individual to think like that, because bad things could happen, but a culture, bad things on a much larger scale, that is where you get a 9-11, or a Holocaust. If anything we do is due to hate, that is a RED FLAG reality’s history shows us we are moving in the wrong direction.
If humans are unable view reality objectively, is there any difference between that and there not being a single reality?
The difference is knowing there is one reality, and that the truth resides there; it means you can trust that, if not, let me ask you this: if all reality bends to our thinking! Why would we write papers about our experiments, stating that this is the environment we set up, these are the conditions of our variable, and these are the stresses we placed on things? We assume reality and truth are what they are all the time, and we know that if you change reality, make the conditions different, the truth also changes.
We end up in trouble when we assume things are what they are not, or are not what they are, and that failure rests on us, not reality. We should have a great pause, knowing that truth is not going to bend to our bias, so we should, at all costs, be careful to cast our bias aside lest we put our fingers on a scale and tilt it where we want it to go.
@KellyJay saidWhy do people still believe in Gods?
We can only do our best, but we have limitations, and we must acknowledge them. Knowing this, we should be very careful about what we trust and claim to know, especially when our assumptions can have real-world consequences. We can paint the entire world so that some lives are less than, pointing to some just to make people think the world would be better off without them, ...[text shortened]... areful to cast our bias aside lest we put our fingers on a scale and tilt it where we want it to go.
Or think vaccinations cause autism?
Or vote trump?
@shavixmir saidNot everyone believes everything the same way, even when looking at the same data. Once trust is ruined, even speaking the truth is not persuasive. I don’t believe in gods, but God, with respect to vaccinations, trust was ruined when they altered the common safeguards and forced vaccinations on people. Not everyone believes Trump is pure evil, and those who do simply go overboard trying to convince others he is, to the point of belittling them, so they stop listening to their reasoning after they are attacked relentlessly, and they watch every single thing he does, no matter what it is, get called an evil work.
Why do people still believe in Gods?
Or think vaccinations cause autism?
Or vote trump?
@KellyJay saidThat’s your truth.
Not everyone believes everything the same way, even when looking at the same data. Once trust is ruined, even speaking the truth is not persuasive. I don’t believe in gods, but God, with respect to vaccinations, trust was ruined when they altered the common safeguards and forced vaccinations on people. Not everyone believes Trump is pure evil, and those who do simply go o ...[text shortened]... entlessly, and they watch every single thing he does, no matter what it is, get called an evil work.
What’s the reality?
@shavixmir saidMy opinions start and end with me, reality is not affected by what I accept or reject,
That’s your truth.
What’s the reality?
@KellyJay saidIf I report to you a tree fell in the woods near where I live that might be reality, but only if I told you the truth. If I told all of your neighbors the same thing you might hear several of your neighbors tell you the same thing I told you. You would be inclined to accept that was the truth. And you would be convinced that is reality.
I’ve been thinking about truth, and how, as I believe it is constrained only by reality, not by our personal opinions of it. What I am talking about isn’t about you or me; the topic is whether a belief about anything can be true and not be part of reality itself. I am saying no: all truth is constrained by reality, not by my or your personal opinions of it or of each other ...[text shortened]... ble to show an error in what we think if we think all of our thoughts are true because we have them.
Only if you look to see if there is a tree down where I said would you know reality. This seems like an easy way to know reality is not what you were told. But if someone reports what happened in Iran few people are going to go there to find out reality so you know what the truth is. So they are relying on reports which may or may not be true. But if people hear the same thing from NBC, ABC, CBS and FOX they will be convinced that is reality even if it is not.
This is why propaganda is effective. When people hear the same reports from several different sources most of them believe it. It is human nature. That is what propagandists take advantage of. They take advantage of that human nature and that is why propaganda is so effective.
I once tried to convince people in the city that cow tipping was not real. I told them I grew up on a dairy farm and that was not reality. Most of them refused to believe me. They sleep laying down I told them. Compared to them I was an expert, but most still refused to believe me.
Is is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.