(October 12, 2016 at 4:04 am)robvalue Wrote: Okay, I still don't know what you think science is. Or why any of this matters. So I'm giving up. You can't even give one single example of any relevance whatsoever, so I stick to my conclusion that this is about your religious beliefs only. If you don't even know what else it is about, I sure as hell don't.
I can informally get mundane knowledge through observations, yes. It's knowledge to me, but it's still dependent upon my memory and ability to accurately classify events. If I tell someone else, it's not knowledge to them. They may take my word on mundane matters. That's all they can do. They don't know anything. If they take my word that I've seen a ghost, they are an idiot. If I take the word of a thousand people all saying they have "seen a ghost", I have not gained any knowledge. I've succumbed to flawed evidence. And what use is my conclusion? Still don't even know what a ghost is, what it does, or what I can possibly do about it. Useless.
I'm sceptical enough of my own observations to realise that if I think I saw a ghost, most likely I saw no such thing. My memory and judgement are not foolproof. Nor do I have any actual definition or criteria for what is and isn't a ghost. I'm going on emotion and intuition. Not reliable.
So your normal escapes then....
"I don't even know what the means"... and "why does this even matter" I am surprised how often you can be against something when you don't know what it even is.
As I stated before, in legal and historical matters, testimony is considered evidence, and I don't feel that you gave much of any reason to change that. I am however amazed that some of the people here, can function, with such flawed observation and memory of reality.
