You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Murican ’Cepshunulizm
I did. It was hard to go beyond the words "indisputable facts" but I forced myself to continue!
I did. It was hard to go beyond the words "indisputable facts" but I forced myself to continue!
Feel free to point out any you think you can dispute.
It's not 'think I can dispute', it's simply dispute. It is the "if you disagree with me you are wrong" mentality which leads me to comment without upvoting. I'll not bother you any more if you prefer comments solely from those who disagree! Apologies if I've offended.
I believe that jsteck was disagreeing with Larken's contention that there is such a thing as an indisputable fact, not the particular facts that he stated.
An "indisputable fact" is sort of like "the science is settled". There is always room for dispute. And the science is never settled. The nature of science is that it is always only an approximation of reality, useful in a particular limited domain.
Even 2 + 2 = 4 only holds in particular integer groups/fields with particular definitions of 2, +, =, and 4. Since most people are only familiar with the one standard integer field, that statement is largely "indisputable", but widen the domain, and it isn't.
I still haven't figured out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Keep up the good work, Larken. Always inspiring. Always challenging for those who still worship authority.