View Poll Results: Is the argument valid?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, the argument is valid.

    0 0%
  • No, the argument is not valid.

    3 100.00%
  • I don't know.

    0 0%
  • The argument doesn't make sense.

    0 0%
  • The question doesn't make sense.

    0 0%
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Scientific knowledge about atoms is true

  1. Top | #1
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,314
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    46

    Scientific knowledge about atoms is true

    This argument may be a bit difficult to parse, but it is definitely either valid or not valid. So, if you have an opinion, thanks to share it.

    If the following sentence is true,

    If scientific knowledge about atoms is true, then atoms exist,

    then scientific knowledge about atoms is true;

    Therefore, scientific knowledge about atoms is true.
    EB

  2. Top | #2
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,061
    Rep Power
    13
    W ha we know objectively is experiment with instrumentation and observation. Math models that are predictive.

    Whether an atom exists as we imagine it is not knowable.

    As Carver Meade said, I do not know if an electron exists but I know I can do useful things with the concept.

    I go with Popper. The only reasonable objective knowledge is an experiment. Beyond that it becomes subjective interpretation.

    One of AE's bombshells was that there can be no absolute frame of reference. Therefore all knowledge is relative. All measurements are relative to a standard, which for science is SI.

    If the following sentence is true,

    If scientific knowledge about atoms is true, then atoms exist,

    then scientific knowledge about atoms is true;

    Therefore, scientific knowledge about atoms is true.


    For me the first sentence is false. for reasons stated above. The two conclusions are then also false.

    Logically then scientific knowledge about atoms is true; does not follow from If scientific knowledge about atoms is true, then atoms exist,


    It seems to reduce to 'if knowledge about atoms is true then knowledge about atoms is true', Nothing is proven. 'then atoms are real' has no bearing n the argument.
    Last edited by steve_bank; 11-16-2019 at 01:31 AM.

  3. Top | #3
    Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    9,058
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    26,964
    Rep Power
    71
    Because not everything is not known or understood doesn't mean that nothing is known or understood. There is no complete understanding of atoms, but something is understood or known about the properties of atoms.

  4. Top | #4
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,314
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Because not everything is not known or understood doesn't mean that nothing is known or understood. There is no complete understanding of atoms, but something is understood or known about the properties of atoms.
    Thank you to vote before commenting.
    EB

  5. Top | #5
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,437
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    29,650
    Rep Power
    54
    The existence of atoms does not make scientific knowledge about atoms true. The existence of atoms is proof there are atoms, that does not prove scientific knowledge of atoms is true beyond knowing of their existence.

    Its even worse. It's not true that if scientific knowledge of atoms is true that atoms exist. It's only true that (some) scientific knowledge of atoms is true.

  6. Top | #6
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    43
    Archived
    2,221
    Total Posts
    2,264
    Rep Power
    56
    “Scientific knowledge about atoms is true” does not follow from “If scientific knowledge about atoms is true, then atoms exist”.

  7. Top | #7
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,314
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Ahab View Post
    “Scientific knowledge about atoms is true” does not follow from “If scientific knowledge about atoms is true, then atoms exist”.
    Sure, but that is not at all what the argument claims.
    EB

  8. Top | #8
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,314
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    The existence of atoms does not make scientific knowledge about atoms true. The existence of atoms is proof there are atoms, that does not prove scientific knowledge of atoms is true beyond knowing of their existence.

    Its even worse. It's not true that if scientific knowledge of atoms is true that atoms exist. It's only true that (some) scientific knowledge of atoms is true.
    I don't know but in any case this is not what the argument claims.

    I knew it would be a bit too difficult to parse.
    EB

  9. Top | #9
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,437
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    29,650
    Rep Power
    54
    I was responding to the fail of claim atoms exist. And, if anything I probably parsed a bit more than the text was intended to imply.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •