Posted on 04/06/2010 7:07:19 AM PDT by truthfinder9
Intelligent people have for centuries professed false beliefs. Repeating something that is false does not make it true.
Of course, scientists and liberals don't spend a great deal of time denying the reality of the supernatural beliefs of the "indigenous pipples" who, as part of the "thesis" of the historical dialectic, are above all critique.
I think there can be a difference between facts and truth. I also think that there are objective or non-conditional truths - myths can be true in this sense though not factual. I believe, I'm almost certain, we disagree on both statements.
even if they are useful to some.
We might agree that myths are useful to some.
One of the problems I find on the FR, especially on the Religion Forum, is that people make up word meanings the way they make up their beliefs. It is no wonder that we tend to talk past each other.
The agreed upon meaning of the word truth is synonymous with fact, which can be verified by a simple reference to any dictionary.
Now, if we are going to make up our own meanings then the whole point of any discussion meaningless, which is becoming apparent more and more every day on these threads.
I also think that there are objective or non-conditional truths - myths can be true in this sense though not factual
And how do you prove what is not factual? You don't.
They are often used as synonyms but they are different words with different meanings also.
And how do you prove what is not factual? You don't.
Some facts can be proved. It's also proven that all that is true is not provable - Gödel. I.e., the sets of "true" and "provable" are not identities.
And since this has been proven, you'd have to agree that it is "fact."
Moses wrote the Torah around 1425 BC on "paper". That story about Sargon didn't appear until 800yrs later and was written on clay.
According to the myth. Evidence suggests 6th century BC.
Like what?
Gödel
Who's that?
One quote from your hero: "I like Islam: it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."[Hao Wang (1997), A logical journey: from Gödel to philosophy, The MIT Press, p. 148]
That would be a textbook ad hominem argument.
Godel was a brilliant mathematician. His views on Islam are as relevant to his mathematic proof that I referred to as Max Planck’s religion are to Quantum Theory.
If you have disproved either, please post.
Hilbert's tenth problem is a famous example.
Who's that?
Kurt Godel (1906-1978) logician, mathematician. Emeritus professor at the Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton.
Brilliant mathematician and all around weird guy.
Synopsis please.
It shows that brilliance in one field is insanity in another, all in one person. Unlike Einstein he believed in a personal deity, just because. It shows that a perfectly logical and consistent person is capable of superstitious beliefs divorced of all reason.
Mathematics doesn't care who discovered the proof. It's irrelevant.
HIlbert's tenth problem involves Diophantine equations. It involves an obvious truth and asks for a proof - an algorithm. Matiyasevich, among others, proved that it was unprovable. It's an example, or perhaps corollary to the Incompleteness Theorem.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.
This "lawlessness", iniquity, is violation of God's laws, God's commandments and statutes. The most visible of these is the overthrow of the Lord's Jesus Christ's sabbath and the institution of man's sabbath. Ditto with the overthrow of the Lord's other holy days and the subsitition of man made syncrenistic "holidays" such as Easter, Christmas and the whole liturgical calendar of the modern church.
Yet Einstein was wrong about Quantum Theory and a hindu-istic theorist was correct.
Pythagoras founded the religion Pythagoreanism which I doubt you adhere to, though no one quarrels with his work with squares. Kepler also followed Pythagoras in the "music of the spheres, yet his laws of planetary motion corrected centuries old errors.
Newton was deep into Alchemy, yet his work on Optics, among other things, was revolutionary.
Godel and Einstein were great friends at Princeton - despite their differences in religious views. Einstein said his "own work no longer meant much, that he came to the Institute merely…to have the privilege of walking home with Gödel". Godel eventually starved himself to death.
Science and math are strewn with wild and crazy, unstable and weirdly religious characters. They make interesting biographies. However, their accomplishments in their fields are judged on their own merits. No one would rationally decide whether science or math proof is true based on the life of the practitioner.
I suspect it involves 'axiomatic' truth, which is theoretical. I further suspect that maybe it is akin to uncertainty principle, which is a limit imposed by the model and not the true nature of the energy 'particle.'
I am asking for an example of something that is true but cannot be proven in the real world, not in a mathematical model.
Nope. That's a completely different discussion.
This is just math. Diophantine equations are equations of a particular form.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.