Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Is “good evidence” a subjective or objective determination?

  1. Top | #21
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    7,335
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    12,374
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Objective facts are true even if the overwhelming majority rejects them.
    Before one can accept this one has to have decided what is real. I'm reminded of an experience from very early childhood. A police officer was telling us about traffic safety, crossing streets safely, looking in both directions, etc. He said that if you see a car coming toward you and you cover your eyes because you're afraid, the car doesn't go away. That really stuck with me.

  2. Top | #22
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    6,157
    Rep Power
    20
    By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

    In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjrecture. Again a Perry Mason episode.

  3. Top | #23
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguous states westernmost - IOW here
    Posts
    13,900
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    32,113
    Rep Power
    61
    Basically I watched the whole original Perry Mason series recently. There is no way a Perry Mason episode relates to establishing facts.

    Very twisty. Something is always missing when Perry gets the loser to confess. There is no scene to which one can refer that the person actually did the deed. there is only the word picture Perry draws when accusing.

  4. Top | #24
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    6,157
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Basically I watched the whole original Perry Mason series recently. There is no way a Perry Mason episode relates to establishing facts.

    Very twisty. Something is always missing when Perry gets the loser to confess. There is no scene to which one can refer that the person actually did the deed. there is only the word picture Perry draws when accusing.
    It surely does. How the application of logic goes goes from tne subjective and circumstantial to objective truth.

    Glad to see my old nemesis is still rolling around.

  5. Top | #25
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,480
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

    In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...
    I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.

  6. Top | #26
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    6,157
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

    In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...
    I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.
    There are 3 general levels of science. Relativistic where things go very fast and time dilation becomes significant. Newtonian here on the surface which governs things like baseballs and jets, and quantum where thongs are very small like atoms.

    All measurers are relative in that they are refernced to a point or standard. If something weighs 1o kg it is relative to the kg standard.. The philosophical bombshell Einstein dropped was that there are no absolutes.

    Velocity is relative to an in inertial frame an xyz set of axis in space. A space ship in motion is an inertial frame.


    Two cars one at 50 mph and the other at 70 mph have velocities relative to the ground. To the 50 mph car the 70 mph car is moving at 20mph faster to its inertial frame.

    People on the ISS are aging differently than those on the ground. Relativistic corrections for time dilation have to made for GP clocks on Seattleites ab\nd the ground.

    Thanks for the rep comment. We all sorely need civility.

    The global reference points are Stem International or SI. Google SI units NIST and you will find an explanation and list of units.

  7. Top | #27
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    6,101
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    19,077
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

    In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...
    I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.
    If you thought that then you would be wrong. Someone in a different reference frame would still agree that the car was traveling at 50mph in the reference frame in which that measurement was made.

Posting Permissions

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