Originally posted by FetchmyjunkCome on old chap, every man and his dog knows that 2 definitions were provided, one of which supported the argument presented. It is actually to twhitehead's credit that he provided both possible definitions and had he not done sir you would most certainly have been on his back about it.
So which parts of the dictionary definition that you quoted did you not agree with and why?
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadI fully accept, and have stated so multiple times, that there is the other usage in which facts are 'true'.
I agreed with all of it. But all of it was two distinct meanings of the word fact. My usage in this thread was the first meaning. I fully accept, and have stated so multiple times, that there is the other usage in which facts are 'true'. But this thread is about 'brute facts' and in particular, my usage of the term. Even 'brute fact' has other usages.
When did you do this? You categorically stated that "facts are not true". How is it logically possible for a fact to be "true" and "not true"? You said that a brute fact was a fact. I said a fact is something that is known to be true. You said no facts are not true. On which page of this thread did you admit that facts are true? If you did you would be contradicting the statement you made when you said facts are not true.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI said facts are known to be true. He disagreed and said facts are not true. He has been trying to defend his stance ever since.
Come on old chap, every man and his dog knows that 2 definitions were provided, one of which supported the argument presented. It is actually to twhitehead's credit that he provided both possible definitions and had he not done sir you would most certainly have been on his back about it.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAt some point in the past (to the people then living) it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth At no point was this true.
I said facts are known to be true. He disagreed and said facts are not true. He has been trying to defend his stance ever since.
As facts are not brute or absolute, there is always the possibility that more compelling evidence will come to light to refute them. 'Truth' (whatever that is) would necessarily be unchanging, which differentiates it from facts. - This of course is the downfall of any religion that claims to hold 'the truth.' (Especially when they even struggle to establish facts).
5 edits
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeWow so now you are saying truth is absolute? (Rookie mistake 😛)
At some point in the past (to the people then living) it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth At no point was this true.
As facts are not brute or absolute, there is always the possibility that more compelling evidence will come to light to refute them. 'Truth' (whatever that is) would necessarily be unchanging, which differentiates ...[text shortened]... ligion that claims to hold 'the truth.' (Especially when they even struggle to establish facts).
Facts are known to be true. People did not 'know' that the sun revolved around the sun.They thought they did. So they thought it was a fact but it wasn't.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou need to read between the lines sir. I said truth 'whatever that is.' (I also spoke about what it 'necessarily' would mean and how its unchanging nature would differentiate it from facts).
Wow so now you are saying truth is absolute?
But to clarify for you, no, truth is not absolute, because the only truth we have is limited by our finite existence and experiences.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeBut to clarify for you, no, truth is not absolute, because the only truth we have is limited by our finite existence and experiences.
You need to read between the lines sir. I said truth 'whatever that is.' (I also spoke about what it 'necessarily' would mean and how its unchanging nature would differentiate it from facts).
But to clarify for you, no, truth is not absolute, because the only truth we have is limited by our finite existence and experiences.
You can't have your cake and eat it dear ghost. Either truth is unchanging or it is not. So which is it?
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeIs I like strawberries and cream a brute fact?
You need to read between the lines sir. I said truth 'whatever that is.' (I also spoke about what it 'necessarily' would mean and how its unchanging nature would differentiate it from facts).
But to clarify for you, no, truth is not absolute, because the only truth we have is limited by our finite existence and experiences.
Originally posted by twhiteheadPage 4 of this thread:
I fully accept, and have stated so multiple times, that there is the other usage in which facts are 'true'.
Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
When did you do this?
Originally posted by twhitehead
The word 'fact' has a rather wide range of meaning. In some contexts it may refer to a piece of information about something, in other cases it may refer to the something that that information is about. And as in the case of the dictionary you found, it could refer to information that is accepted or agreed upon by parties in a court case. Context is important.
You categorically stated that "facts are not true". How is it logically possible for a fact to be "true" and "not true"?
When the word has more than one meaning.
Here, educate yourself:
http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/for-students-and-parents/words-with-multiple-meanings.html
How is it logically possible for a person to duck out of an argument even though they don't have feathers?
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeAt some point in the past (to the people then living) it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth.
At some point in the past (to the people then living) it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth At no point was this true.
As facts are not brute or absolute, there is always the possibility that more compelling evidence will come to light to refute them. 'Truth' (whatever that is) would necessarily be unchanging, which differentiates ...[text shortened]... ligion that claims to hold 'the truth.' (Especially when they even struggle to establish facts).
No, that was never a 'fact'. The sun appears (to an observer on the ground) to be moving around the earth, that is a fact. It's also a fact that life appears to have evolved, but unless or until this can be proven it is not a bona fide fact. Mere appearances and beliefs are poor substitutes for bona fide provable facts.
A fact that is "not true" is a contradiction in terms... it can't be a fact if it is simply believed (but not known) to be so.
Originally posted by lemon limeOh great, not only do we have absolute facts and brute facts, we now have bona fide facts crashing the party.
[b]At some point in the past (to the people then living) it was a fact that the sun revolved around the Earth.
No, that was never a 'fact'. The sun appears (to an observer on the ground) to be moving around the earth, that is a fact. It's also a fact that life appears to have evolved, but unless or until this can be proven it is not a bona fide fac ...[text shortened]... contradiction in terms... it can't be a fact if it is simply believed (but not known) to be so.[/b]
You're a brute sir, and that's a fact.
(You might want to edit out your last sentence though. 'Faith' is only believed, not known, so by your own reasoning can't be factual or true).
Originally posted by twhiteheadSomething that is not "not true" is "false". How can something be "true" and "false" at the same time? You could say it is "neither true nor false". But saying only that it is "not true" is a contradiction. One word cannot have two contradictory meanings.
Page 4 of this thread:
Originally posted by twhitehead
[quote]The word 'fact' has a rather wide range of meaning. In some contexts it may refer to a piece of information about something, in other cases it may refer to the something that that information is about. And as in the case of the dictionary you found, it could refer to information that i ...[text shortened]... logically possible for a person to duck out of an argument even though they don't have feathers?