Riketto Wrote:You just did a step forward Ton by not claiming things without having solid evidence.I just want to point out that you can't just use "I believe" as some sort of cover for every crackpot idea that comes to mind, and then use it as a way to avoid having to support that crackpot idea. It is not a "step forward." It's just another version of "I cannot prove that it IS, but you cannot prove that it ISN'T." At some point you have to prove SOMETHING, since you're the one promoting the crackpot ideas.
Riketto Wrote:The reason why i say that can not be proven is because i am dealing with people that only believe in a physical-mental way.This is more of the same. You want to dismiss the best option for learning in order to promote an option that you admit doesn't work. Then you try to cloak it in mysticism and apply the same "just because we can't detect it doesn't mean it's not there" nonsense.
I have little interest in the things you cannot detect yet believe to be real. The fact that you don't understand how absurd that approach is says a lot about where humanity stands today, and it's not very good. Thankfully we're making progress, but there are still too many people who won't consider such an idea critically and realize that it's the ramblings of the insane.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould