What is a "Fact"

[Inner_man]

There has been some interesting discussion on another thread as to what is FACT? I have had many lively discussions over the years when presenting the concept that there are no true facts (as everyday useage suggests) only our anthropogenic perspectives, or our need to rationalise how we see the universe in terms of our human perspective or psychological needs.

So Ill start the ball rolling by stating that there are no true hardwritten facts only theory, that facts only exist until experimental evidence is observed disproving them and newer refined "facts" emerge waiting for the day when newer evidence is observed calling for further refinement of the so-called facts.

[Teazer]

IMO there are plenty of facts which are easy to verify, it's the explanations of the facts that can change. For instance, fact: I'm sitting at the computer, typing. How will that change by perspective and culture? Similarly, one could cite a fact that Iraq occupied Kuwait in 1990. Sure there are varying explanations as to why, but how would the fact itself change?
The weird and fuzzy bits tends to be what specific demarcations are made by people, what facts they consider interesting etc, not the facts themselves.

[Walter Joyce]

Call me simple but when someone asks for a definition I go to a dictionary:



Main Entry:
fact Listen to the pronunciation of fact
Pronunciation:
\ˈfakt\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Latin factum, from neuter of factus, past participle of facere
Date:
15th century

1: a thing done: as aobsolete : feat b: crime <accessory after the fact> carchaic : action 2archaic : performance , doing3: the quality of being actual : actuality <a question of fact hinges on evidence>4 a: something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact> b: an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality
— in fact
: in truth

So I'd venture that definition 5 is the one that troubles you.

[affa]

sorry... don't have time, but... scattershot!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

[Steve James]

This was one of the professor's favorite philosophy questions. It always led to the alleged question, "If a bear shits in the woods, do it make a sound?" (Ok, it was "tree falls.") Is it a fact that trees always make a sound when they fall? But, if the tree hasn't fallen yet, is it a fact that it "will" make a sound? Sure it is. There are lots of facts. The sky is blue, er, no, the sky is black. There are all sorts of facts; physical, mental, past, future. There are so many that the one word cannot cover all types. That 's why in the other thread I suggested changing "fact" to "demonstrable" or "repeatable" event. The speed of light can be demonstrated over and over again; and that's why we say it's a fact ...er, scientists don't really use the term "fact" because it's unscientific.

[Walter Joyce]

This was one of the professor's favorite philosophy questions. It always led to the alleged question, "If a bear shits in the woods, do it make a sound?" (Ok, it was "tree falls.") Is it a fact that trees always make a sound when they fall? But, if the tree hasn't fallen yet, is it a fact that it "will" make a sound? Sure it is. There are lots of facts. The sky is blue, er, no, the sky is black. There are all sorts of facts; physical, mental, past, future. There are so many that the one word cannot cover all types. That 's why in the other thread I suggested changing "fact" to "demonstrable" or "repeatable" event. The speed of light can be demonstrated over and over again; and that's why we say it's a fact ...er, scientists don't really use the term "fact" because it's unscientific.

Funny my take on the tree falling in the woods went to the question as to whether the role of perception of a phenomenon is an essential part of the phenomenon.

I wondered, well sound waves will travel every time a tree falls in the woods, but if there is no receptor for those waves, is it really sound?

[Steve James]

Funny my take on the tree falling in the woods went to the question as to whether the role of perception of a phenomenon is an essential part of the phenomenon.

The idea of a necessary observer to a phenomenon comes much later. The 18th c. wasn't into Heisenberg uncertainty. But, in the first question, the bear would hear the shite fall (or not). The epistemological problem remains. How do we "know" that it made a sound or that it will make a sound?

If we ask a question like, "If a person falls out of a plane from 30,000 feet, will he die?" Does that depend on whether I see him fall or not? Has everyone who has fallen without a parachute from a plane at that height died? Well, no. It happened at least once in WW2. So, is it a fact that you will die; or is it a fact that you won't?

[Walter Joyce]

The idea of a necessary observer to a phenomenon comes much later.

Well maybe for you, but I often do things in reverse order.

[Doc Stier]

Funny my take on the tree falling in the woods went to the question as to whether the role of perception of a phenomenon is an essential part of the phenomenon.

Right on, man.

Perception is Reality.



Hence, the often stated observation that each individual experiences a separate reality based upon his or her own perception. For example, how you react and respond to any situation is usually not determined so much by what is actually happening as by what you perceive is actually happening, and these are very often entirely different things altogether. Haven't you ever wondered what someone thought you thought they thought? Hmmm!

Doc

[Inner_man]

This was one of the professor's favorite philosophy questions. It always led to the alleged question, "If a bear shits in the woods, do it make a sound?" (Ok, it was "tree falls.") Is it a fact that trees always make a sound when they fall? But, if the tree hasn't fallen yet, is it a fact that it "will" make a sound? Sure it is. There are lots of facts. The sky is blue, er, no, the sky is black. There are all sorts of facts; physical, mental, past, future. There are so many that the one word cannot cover all types. That 's why in the other thread I suggested changing "fact" to "demonstrable" or "repeatable" event. The speed of light can be demonstrated over and over again; and that's why we say it's a fact ...er, scientists don't really use the term "fact" because it's unscientific.

Funny I thought the question was, "If my wife's not around when I speak am I still wrong?"

[Steve James]

Funny I thought the question was, "If my wife's not around when I speak am I still wrong?"

That's the way it always worked for me. Then again, the way it worked for me was, "If it's my day off, do I have plans?"

[Darth Rock&Roll]

I think to start to deconstruct language in the hopes of having actions supported is why these things arise.

It is especially difficult when you have a large group of people who "perceive" the truth willfully incorrectly in order to validate their own world view.
Reality si not perception. If anything, most people perceptions escape reality entirely.
Most people don't want to deal with reality or actuality, especially when it comes to questioning their views of the world or themselves.

Truth is. Truth cannot be broken by manipulation of words or changing of perceptions.

There are facts. You either know them or you don't.

[Ron Panunto]

If we ask a question like, "If a person falls out of a plane from 30,000 feet, will he die?" Does that depend on whether I see him fall or not? Has everyone who has fallen without a parachute from a plane at that height died? Well, no. It happened at least once in WW2. So, is it a fact that you will die; or is it a fact that you won't?

Well I think that this could be clarified by stating the probability that a particular event would occur. That is, that 99.999999999% of the time a person will die when he jumps out of a plane at 30,000 feet. I think that many of the outcomes that we consider facts are simply high probability events. Others, however are not. So I think it's important to distinguish between the two.

Quantum mechanics has a lot of these type events. Electrons used to be thought of distinct objects orbiting the nucleus like planets rotating around our sun, but now they are seen as a probability wave that is "potentially" everywhere around the nucleus (more like a cloud) at any given time. Its position only manifests itself in one particular place when it is observed because the observation itself causes the electrons probability wave to collapse into an observable particle.

So the person jumping out of a plane could be considered as existing in a "probability wave" until he hits the ground, at which time his wave will collapse and he will be found dead or alive (the observation).

[Darth Rock&Roll]

when you add "if" it is no longer in the realms of facts and figures.

It is not a fact someone will die if "x", simply because the outcome has not occured.

facts are based on outcomes. They are the consequence of cause and effect.

[Wuyizidi]

To me fact is a 'smaller' type of truth that usually has taken place. Example: I went to grocery store this morning. Truth is something bigger and deeper, that you can only know by various degree of certainty. For example: is there a god, etc.

Either way, they have to do with reality, and reality is something that remains true no matter what anyone believes.