EAllusion wrote:Every single fact discussed in this thread is only trusted because it is established via implied scientific consensus. No one here is personally building equipment to measure the constitution of the atmosphere and reporting their findings. Citing what the majority of relevant experts think is not argument ad populum as a fantasy insofar as expertise is being used as a heuristic to determine what likely is the case. Argument ad populum is when you argue that something is true because it is popular to think. That is distinct from arguing that something is likely to be the case if a particular group of authorities think so. The former is fallacious; we couldn't function without the later. Almost every scientific fact someone knows and cites is built upon the implicit trust in the community of scientists and how they build reliable knowledge through agreement on methods and facts.
That's ridiculous. Facts aren't trusted because "it is established via implied scientific consensus". Facts are trusted because they can't be reasonably disputed.
For example, it is a fact I exist and am typing this. There has never been a scientific consensus to establish that as a fact.
That would be ridiculous -- if EA had said it. Strawman.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Res Ipsa wrote:That would be ridiculous -- if EA had said it. Strawman.
Yet another bald-faced lie Brad? At this point, I just giggle at your posts. You have zero credibility with me.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
The CCC wrote:Scientific consensus on a theory is better than a fact.
faqs certainly doesn't have a lock on saying stupid stuff.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Res Ipsa wrote:That would be ridiculous -- if EA had said it. Strawman.
Yet another bald-faced lie Brad? At this point, I just giggle at your posts. You have zero credibility with me.
Show me exactly how what I posted was a "lie," Tobin. Use my exact words, the exact words from your post, and the exact words from EA's post. Should be easy if it was "bald-faced."
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Res Ipsa wrote:Show me exactly how what I posted was a "lie," Tobin. Use my exact words, the exact words from your post, and the exact words from EA's post. Should be easy if it was "bald-faced."
EAllusion wrote:Every single fact discussed in this thread is only trusted because it is established via implied scientific consensus... Almost every scientific fact someone knows and cites is built upon the implicit trust in the community of scientists and how they build reliable knowledge through agreement on methods and facts.
Tobin wrote:That's ridiculous. Facts aren't trusted because "it is established via implied scientific consensus". Facts are trusted because they can't be reasonably disputed.
For example, it is a fact I exist and am typing this. There has never been a scientific consensus to establish that as a fact.
Res Ipsa wrote:That would be ridiculous -- if EA had said it. Strawman.
But if you read what I've underlined and bolded you'll see he did say EXACTLY what I stated. That is why your claim is:
Tobin wrote:Yet another bald-faced lie Brad? At this point, I just giggle at your posts. You have zero credibility with me.
Here is another fact. You are a pathological liar Brad. Even when you have the facts in front of you, you can't acknowledge them.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
"Facts" is not the same as an identified subset of facts.
by the way, on the subject of failing to acknowledge facts that are "right in front of you." What are the answers to your final exam on the composition of the atmosphere?
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
One small disagreement. Psychiatrists are medical doctors who specialize in diseases of the mind. So while I wouldn't necessarily go to a podiatrist for the treatment of a head cold. They'd know enough general medicine to point me in the right direction.
Yes, I understand that. One of my daughters is a qualified and respected psychiatrist whose research has been published in peer reviewed journals, and she is, of course, also an M.D. I'm not implying there is a significant likelihood that a typical psychiatrist would actually be prone to dismiss such abdominal pain as imaginary or a case of hypochondria, unless the patient was a known, chronic hypochondriac, but even if that were the case, a real hypochondriac would probably be the last person to prefer the psychiatrist's diagnosis over that of the general practitioner and the gastroenterologists.
ETA to correct improper use of "who's" when I meant the possessive pronoun "whose." I almost never mess up on improper use of apostrophes. It must be creeping senility!
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jan 26, 2016 8:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
faqs certainly doesn't have a lock on saying stupid stuff.
I almost never mess up on improper use of apostrophes. It must be creeping senility!