|
|
Post by paulus on Jan 28, 2019 6:47:49 GMT -5
Something is either true or it isn't. Truth does not have gray areas. A touch naive Jimmy. For something to be objectively true - it needs to be proven that is true for all observers in all places. These are generally limited to mathematical / logical proofs. Very little in the rather more messy real world can be said to be 100% objectively true. Consider even simple "obviously true" statements; People need air to live. Until you look at it closely & realise that actually air is made up of a mixture of atoms. And that mix can be adjusted so that it no longer looks like air we breath and we can still live. Water freezes at 0 degrees. Until you look at it closely and realise that only holds at atmospheric pressure. And is also dependant on the velocity of the particles. And if you have only a small amount of water, quantum effects can change this behaviour markedly. Even something as simple as the order of two events does not have an objective truth. Einstein's relativity teaches us that two observers can see two events in opposite order depending on their reference frame. But a 3rd observer can say one of them actually occurred before the other right? No! Both observers are correct about their "truth". For something complex that involves human interactions - there is no truth, just opinion. You can get to a level of confidence based on aggregate of evidential items - but you can never get to 100% definitive proof. Investigating the world often involves obtaining evidence that is well outside your ability to directly sense - how sure can you be of the validity of that evidence and the people & systems that were used to collect it? Certainly not 100% sure when you realise that even your own senses are fallible and susceptible to cognitive biases. In almost all cases, there is always grey. |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Jan 28, 2019 7:50:46 GMT -5
After reading that, I feel as though I've been lectured by Nietzsche... 😂 Very interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Jan 28, 2019 8:10:56 GMT -5
This is why Adam should have never eaten that damn apple...now we're too smart for our own good, can out-think common sense objectivity and nit-pick the readily apparent truth of things to serve our own self interests.
Damnit Adam...
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jan 28, 2019 8:19:29 GMT -5
Nietzsche is correct! I’m a physicist by training (a long time ago!) - and still have a strong amateur interest in quantum mechanics - as scientists have dived to the bottom they have unavoidably hit philosophical questions that they are still arguing about. A lot of these questions identified and explored a long time ago by the great philosophers from history. Very interesting indeed 👍
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Jan 28, 2019 9:13:04 GMT -5
I love how a debate about Venezuela morphed into this. 😂 If we're not careful the US government might use this thread as evidence for more sanctions on Venezuela under the title of "educational terrorism." Pipe down, fella's.
|
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jan 28, 2019 11:55:28 GMT -5
I love how a debate about Venezuela morphed into this. 😂 If we're not careful the US government might use this thread as evidence for more sanctions on Venezuela under the title of "educational terrorism." Pipe down, fella's. All of this because DT tweeted something about VZ |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Jan 28, 2019 14:08:39 GMT -5
Something is either true or it isn't. Truth does not have gray areas. A touch naive Jimmy. For something to be objectively true - it needs to be proven that is true for all observers in all places. These are generally limited to mathematical / logical proofs. Very little in the rather more messy real world can be said to be 100% objectively true. Consider even simple "obviously true" statements; People need air to live. Until you look at it closely & realise that actually air is made up of a mixture of atoms. And that mix can be adjusted so that it no longer looks like air we breath and we can still live. Water freezes at 0 degrees. Until you look at it closely and realise that only holds at atmospheric pressure. And is also dependant on the velocity of the particles. And if you have only a small amount of water, quantum effects can change this behaviour markedly. Even something as simple as the order of two events does not have an objective truth. Einstein's relativity teaches us that two observers can see two events in opposite order depending on their reference frame. But a 3rd observer can say one of them actually occurred before the other right? No! Both observers are correct about their "truth". For something complex that involves human interactions - there is no truth, just opinion. You can get to a level of confidence based on aggregate of evidential items - but you can never get to 100% definitive proof. Investigating the world often involves obtaining evidence that is well outside your ability to directly sense - how sure can you be of the validity of that evidence and the people & systems that were used to collect it? Certainly not 100% sure when you realise that even your own senses are fallible and susceptible to cognitive biases. In almost all cases, there is always grey. Going to keep my response a little shorter and just use the "water freezes at 0" example and a couple of my own. That in itself is an incorrect statement bud. The actual scientific term is that 0 degrees C (32F) is the temperature at which water begins to freeze. And that is an absolute truth. 1+1 = 2. There is not gray area. That is factual, verifiable truth. Math does not lie. I was born on October 27th. That is factual, verifiable truth. There is documented, 3rd party proof from a hospital. Richard Nixon directed the wiretapping of the DNC at the Watergate Hotel. That is factual, verifiable truth. There are tape recordings to prove it. I'll say this again .... There is no gray area when it comes to truth. The only gray areas come from politicians who wish to spin the real truth into something it isn't. I can take a million things that Trump has said as further examples, including his latest tale of how human trafficking works. Back to the point in regards to VZ although it's a bit ridiculous that there has to be discussion about what truth means..... (Bill Clinton - "It depends on what your definition of *is* is?". Come on now lol). I'll ask again, is the information in the link i gave the truth? If not, then tell me what parts of it are not true. Please understand I am asking for factual input from you guys. I'm not looking to bash you. But keep in mind, I will research the answers just as I am with that linked document. |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jan 28, 2019 14:52:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Jan 28, 2019 15:06:30 GMT -5
We're not going to reach any kind of meaningful discussion if you are going to argue against the validity of 1+1 equaling 2. Again back to point, I'm asking you to tell me what is not correct in that link. I'm not sure why you'll go to the ends of the internet to try to link why 1 + 1 does not = 2 yet I cannot get the answer to the question I actually asked  |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jan 28, 2019 15:25:54 GMT -5
I didn't go to the ends of the internet - I actually did those proofs in my maths module as an undergraduate. It's taught in degree year 1, to teach the undergrads to be wary of exactly the thing we're talking about, namely proof = truth. It's not the case - maths is known to be incomplete and logically inconsistent... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremsI can't tell you what is true/not true in that link - I can only give you my view based on the things I have learned about the situation. Anyone who says they can tell you the truth is... lying  |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Jan 28, 2019 15:52:32 GMT -5
Let's try this, and I'm quoting from the BBC website, I'll link the entire article at the end. How did Venezuela get this bad? Some of the problems go back a long time. However, it is President Maduro and his predecessor, the late President Hugo Chávez, who find themselves the target of much of the current anger. Their socialist governments have been in power since 1999, taking over the country at a time when Venezuela had huge inequality. But the socialist polices brought in which aimed to help the poor backfired. Take price controls, for example. They were introduced by President Chávez to make basic goods more affordable to the poor by capping the price of flour, cooking oil and toiletries. But this meant that the few Venezuelan businesses producing these items no longer found it profitable to make them. Critics also blame the foreign currency controls brought in by President Chávez in 2003 for a flourishing black market in dollars. Since then, Venezuelans wanting to exchange bolivars for dollars have had to apply to a government-run currency agency. Only those deemed to have valid reasons to buy dollars, for example to import goods, have been allowed to change their bolivars at a fixed rate set by the government. With many Venezuelans unable to freely buy dollars, they turned to the black market. Full article www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36319877Any objections to what is said above? |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jan 28, 2019 18:40:58 GMT -5
Wot I think, in blue below How did Venezuela get this bad? Some of the problems go back a long time. However, it is President Maduro and his predecessor, the late President Hugo Chávez, who find themselves the target of much of the current anger. True. 2nd sentence is opinion, but I'd agree. Some people would point to foreign involvement as being primary driver.Their socialist governments have been in power since 1999, taking over the country at a time when Venezuela had huge inequality. Whether they inherited huge inequality is debatable. GINI index is pretty decent stab at standardising the measure of inequality... lower = better (more equal)...
data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?locations=VE
... shows that it was on the rise when Chavez inherited it, but not at historical levels - and has improved a little. (For comparison US GINI index is 40ish)But the socialist polices brought in which aimed to help the poor backfired. Take price controls, for example. They were introduced by President Chávez to make basic goods more affordable to the poor by capping the price of flour, cooking oil and toiletries. First sentence is opinion, but I'd agree... to a degree. The rest is true.But this meant that the few Venezuelan businesses producing these items no longer found it profitable to make them. True. And why joegolferg thinks most of the means of production should have been nationalized too.Critics also blame the foreign currency controls brought in by President Chávez in 2003 for a flourishing black market in dollars. The black market exists. Whether it "flourished" back then I don't know. It is right now tho, as you'd expect given the hyper inflation.
Since then, Venezuelans wanting to exchange bolivars for dollars have had to apply to a government-run currency agency. Only those deemed to have valid reasons to buy dollars, for example to import goods, have been allowed to change their bolivars at a fixed rate set by the government. With many Venezuelans unable to freely buy dollars, they turned to the black market. True.
|
|
|
|
Post by SweetTeeBag on Jan 29, 2019 8:16:13 GMT -5
I will agree with Jimmy that 1+1 does equal 2. Example... 1 Trump term plus his second term in 2020 will equal 2 terms in office. |
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Jan 29, 2019 8:23:45 GMT -5
On this intellectually stimulating topic of the relative truth of things, here's one of my favorites -
You know how you always hear, especially from folks as they get older, "man, that month flew by" or "wow I can't believe the year is over already!" There's a reason for that, I think. Perception is reality, which holds true for our individual perceptions of time. Consider a 20 year old and a 60 year old. For the 20 year old, 1 year is 5% of their life. For the 60 year old, that same year, which is comprised of the same number of days (let's forget leap year for this), is only 1.66% of their life. In other words, your perception of how quickly time passes accelerates with each day/month/year, as those units of time are relative to the total amount of those same units you've already experienced. Take those percentage perceptions of a year for the 20 and 60 year old and think about how those apply to just a single day. In terms of the perception of time during a day, 5% of a total 24hr day is an hour and 12 minutes, but 1.66% is less than a half of an hour (23.99min) - one of those obviously goes by more quickly than the other. So with each passing year, the perception of how "long" that year was will get shorter and shorter as a single year accounts for a smaller and smaller proportion of your total time on earth.
Sure most already think about this, it's not anything you probably haven't heard before, but it's always one I've enjoyed for some odd reason. OK, back to your bickering about grade school arithmetic  |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Jan 29, 2019 13:45:50 GMT -5
SMH @ "quantum truth"
lol.
|
|
International Record: 7-0-0
