Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is a Theory?
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 204 of 249 (495894)
01-24-2009 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by Coyote
01-23-2009 6:04 PM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
"I clearly have no idea of science?" You know not what you think.
Since you got me here... I'll clue you in on something. truth, Truth TRUTH - and so on... is truth and anything short of that is not truth! An almost truth is still and untruth and an untruth is still a lie. Ya'll sound so much cooler on-line.
By the way... I am so much cooler off line!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Coyote, posted 01-23-2009 6:04 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by CosmicChimp, posted 01-24-2009 11:04 PM prophet has not replied
 Message 207 by Coyote, posted 01-25-2009 3:10 AM prophet has not replied
 Message 208 by Percy, posted 01-25-2009 8:32 AM prophet has replied
 Message 209 by Ambercab, posted 01-25-2009 12:42 PM prophet has replied
 Message 215 by RAZD, posted 01-25-2009 8:25 PM prophet has replied
 Message 221 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-26-2009 6:48 AM prophet has not replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 210 of 249 (496000)
01-25-2009 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Rrhain
01-25-2009 1:15 AM


That "now" of yours was written when?
The only answer to the question that can remain correct to;
What itme is it? must be conveyed in the past tense for the present is always becomming the past; my answer: "then"
However, "then" must be given liberal understanding, yet defeats "now" except in a general format such as; 21st century (using USA's dating techniques and only remans accurate for a time)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Rrhain, posted 01-25-2009 1:15 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by Rrhain, posted 01-25-2009 6:33 PM prophet has replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 212 of 249 (496015)
01-25-2009 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Percy
01-25-2009 8:32 AM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
Actually, I'm trying to keep it simple.
Truth: This is a word best avoided entirely in physics [and science]
This is taken from the first line of his post. The problem is it is taken insultingly, by my use of "lie." It was a way of expressing the diminished capisity of the so called "gray area" being so well developed by modern understanding that is attempting to corrupt truth. Just because science has yet to reach truth does not mean (by me) that it does not aspire to.
Edited by prophet, : Yes, it is posted incorrectly and so removed... to be posted properly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Percy, posted 01-25-2009 8:32 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Percy, posted 01-25-2009 8:13 PM prophet has replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 214 of 249 (496023)
01-25-2009 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Rrhain
01-25-2009 6:33 PM


Incorrect. It has a very strict understanding: Some time other than now. If we're dealing with the past, previous to now. If we're dealing with the future, after now.


The past and future are relative to the distance in time allowed. If "now" is considered this century, this year, even this day, you are right. If now is considered "now" in which even the time to type it, puts it in the past - you are wrong... for I wrote the previous now - then. However, I do understand from "where" you are comming.
Cute... Spaceballs, (I've never really cared for woody.) I remember a simular display of the difficulties concerning reading words... by Festus Hagen. It can easily be found on UTube by a search of Festus Hagen when; Festus Parts the Waters. Go to 2:26 and start there.


Incorrect. The metric, once established, is accurate forever. The "21st Century" is an artificial construction, to be sure, but just because it is artificial doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



The "once it is established" is invalidated as it continues to change with time when the operative is "now" for that "now" becomes "then."
Of course, consider many variances of the "now"s use as an adverb, a noun, a adjective or a conjunction its meaning can be validated variously. All this exercise displays is; we are selecting our own prejudices as our foundation and that since your base is an ever moveable "now" and mine, a fixed position "now" we will probably not arrive at the same conclusion... then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Rrhain, posted 01-25-2009 6:33 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Rrhain, posted 01-26-2009 5:47 AM prophet has not replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 216 of 249 (496038)
01-25-2009 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by Percy
01-25-2009 8:13 PM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
Just as discussion of the nature of science and the role of theory within science was off-topic in the Noah's Ark thread, topics from Noah's Ark are off-topic here. I suggest you repost the part of your post about Noah's Ark over in the other thread.


I moved it there. However, part of the reason for that post was to express the scientific method of obtaining results in a scientific manner. The integrity of scienctific investigations to maintian its accuracy during an investigation should not be compromised with the pedestrian methods I have witnessed.


The truth of which I discuss allows science to achieve resolve without the need of the supernatural, supreme reality or ultimate meaning as pertaining to God. However, Ultimate meaning can be confined to the purpose at hand, for example: discovering the feesability of the Ark. Could it have housed and fed the animals within the confines of the natural world and in accordance to its boundaries of time and space as given in the Bible? - excluding God's hand except under certain circumstances ie; The animals were "tamed" and they arrived at the Ark due to God's actions... any others?


Just as diverse institutions use their own language, example: lawyers
So to, does it seem science uses its own definitions at its will. This in no way validate them, but rather detracts from their own veracity. It is not good to impart obstructions in language to impair others. Either my dictionary is in error, or your dictionary is in error. In either case it is not our error only that of the foundation. See "Festus parts the waters," on Utube.


From Wikipedia:
the·o·ry
Function:noun
1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2: abstract thought : speculation
3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art
4 a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances ”often used in the phrase in theory
5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
6 a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b: an unproved assumption : conjecture c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject
synonyms see hypothesis
----------------------------------------------
I take it this is not the definitions you prefer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Percy, posted 01-25-2009 8:13 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Coyote, posted 01-25-2009 10:36 PM prophet has not replied
 Message 219 by Granny Magda, posted 01-25-2009 10:38 PM prophet has not replied
 Message 222 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 8:34 AM prophet has replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 217 of 249 (496039)
01-25-2009 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by RAZD
01-25-2009 8:25 PM


Re: posting tips
thankx for the tip. because time here is spent without heat it is not as easy as it used to be, or will be once winter is over. The context of "lie" I used was to express the falling short of truth. Maybe, I probably should have offered that understanding as well, but their assumption was in error. A lie need not be intentional. Have a good evening I must retire...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by RAZD, posted 01-25-2009 8:25 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 223 of 249 (496133)
01-26-2009 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 222 by Percy
01-26-2009 8:34 AM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
Sorry, rick moranis... I thought it was woody allen. Yes I need glasses!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 8:34 AM Percy has not replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 224 of 249 (496152)
01-26-2009 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 222 by Percy
01-26-2009 8:34 AM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
Yes, you are right; it was from merriam webster dictionary and was provided by the wikipedia link.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 8:34 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 3:07 PM prophet has replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 226 of 249 (496156)
01-26-2009 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Ambercab
01-25-2009 12:42 PM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
Yet another theory: Truth only exists in the human mind .
Of course that is false!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Ambercab, posted 01-25-2009 12:42 PM Ambercab has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 3:59 PM prophet has replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 228 of 249 (496177)
01-26-2009 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Percy
01-26-2009 3:07 PM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
I did it so the correction would stand out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 3:07 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 8:57 PM prophet has not replied

  
prophet
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 54
From: Florida
Joined: 01-19-2009


Message 230 of 249 (496187)
01-26-2009 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Percy
01-26-2009 3:59 PM


Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)

  • Yet another theory: Truth only exists in the human mind
  • Of course that is false!!!
  • Could you elaborate?
    When this is offered, it is with only a human mind as a boundary. The foundation is based on a perspective and limited too much to include animals. Not to mention; it attempts to dismiss God.
    Do I need to copy the entire post then click the reply button and insert my information?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 227 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 3:59 PM Percy has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 231 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 9:19 PM prophet has replied

      
    prophet
    Member (Idle past 5529 days)
    Posts: 54
    From: Florida
    Joined: 01-19-2009


    Message 232 of 249 (496192)
    01-26-2009 9:31 PM
    Reply to: Message 222 by Percy
    01-26-2009 8:34 AM


    Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)


    I have seen even a glance provide more information and truth than an entire page of writing. Written and vocal words contain too many boundaries as it is, and should not be confined so harshly. When you constrict definitions to certain and strict boundaries you may also dismiss, exclude and overlook other additional meanings outside the guidelines of that written word, that could shed better understanding. And it is that which can affect accuracy. In hind sight; perhaps, it would have been better had I used the word hypothesis?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 222 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 8:34 AM Percy has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 235 by RAZD, posted 01-27-2009 8:17 AM prophet has not replied

      
    prophet
    Member (Idle past 5529 days)
    Posts: 54
    From: Florida
    Joined: 01-19-2009


    Message 233 of 249 (496195)
    01-26-2009 10:10 PM
    Reply to: Message 231 by Percy
    01-26-2009 9:19 PM


    Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
    Human limitations influence everything we do, it is inescapable.
    I agree with what you wrote, but not with how you applied it. The words; "human mind as a boundary" is the problem when one considers that animals have minds, some even bigger than ours.
    Are you talking about the theory of evolution? This thread isn't about evolution. It's a discussion about the nature of scientific theory.
    No, I'm not speaking of evolution. But the understanding that lower life forms could have their own knowledge of truth. Just because we MAY not be able to extract that understanding does not mean it does not exist.
    The statement by ambercab was:

    Yet another theory: Truth only exists in the human mind
  • It starts out saying it is a theory.
  • And uses the words; "only exists in the human mind"
    By its own admission; it claims there can be no other owner, which would mean that of a lower life form, or of a higher life form.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 231 by Percy, posted 01-26-2009 9:19 PM Percy has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 234 by homunculus, posted 01-27-2009 2:41 AM prophet has not replied

      
    prophet
    Member (Idle past 5529 days)
    Posts: 54
    From: Florida
    Joined: 01-19-2009


    Message 237 of 249 (496310)
    01-27-2009 3:49 PM
    Reply to: Message 202 by Coyote
    01-23-2009 6:04 PM


    Re: Standards (Prophet, from the Ark Volume thread)
    Now if scientists advertised each theory as the unchanging truth, Truth, TRUTH, or even TRVTH, then I can see why you would question any changes. But science doesn't do that.
    It is religious believers who fail to make the distinction between scientific theory and some form of truth, Truth, TRUTH, or even TRVTH.
    I remember, I did in fact, allow a distinction between theory and truth. Actually, my interpetation was to project theory as a path for science to obtain proof in the persuit of truth... not as truth itself.
    This "truth" does not imply it must be expanded until it reaches the "greater truth" - God.
    See the Eglish Alaphbet Capitol "Q"... it is an English Alaphabet Capitol Q =fact=truth yet... no God implied.
  • fact=truth
  • theory=testing ability-possiblity-probability
    If my wording has lead one astray - maybe, I was in a coma and missed a comma?
    Don't blame science for doing what it is supposed to do.
    the aspect of science trying to wade amoung the "lies": (as meaning that which falls short of truth) to sort out the lies and eliminate them, that what remains can be tested, proven, reproduced with exacting accuracy, and submitted for examination to achieve the status of truth should not be considered insulting. How many different ways did Edison discover not to make a light bulb?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 202 by Coyote, posted 01-23-2009 6:04 PM Coyote has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 238 by Coyote, posted 01-27-2009 4:32 PM prophet has replied

      
    prophet
    Member (Idle past 5529 days)
    Posts: 54
    From: Florida
    Joined: 01-19-2009


    Message 239 of 249 (496529)
    01-28-2009 7:24 PM
    Reply to: Message 238 by Coyote
    01-27-2009 4:32 PM


    Re: Correct terminology (again)
    and seeks only to have an explanation that is as accurate as possible.


    The above use of "accuracy" would be considered as ambigious? Maybe I'm being too harsh... I'll lighten up some.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 238 by Coyote, posted 01-27-2009 4:32 PM Coyote has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024