Quote:


I don't know where I'm going. Can you fill me in?

Quote:


I don't get the distinction you are trying to make.

Quote:


Did you mean 'or' verified? How can you 'test' historical facts?

Isn't what qualifies as fact merely dependent on what standard of evidence you are prepared to accept? Are you suggesting there is some universal standard?

tallowood wrote on Nov 26^th, 2008 at 1:08pm:


I agree. People who do that are probably very devoted to their religion, but I don't happen to share their religion. It's flawed logic. In fact it's a strawman. You're applying a characteristic that is not intrinsic to the whole. In this case it's just a tiny minority.

I don't promote atheism in any way. I disagree with the crticism of religion.  Does that mean I'm not an atheist?

That's a bit like saying that all theists are terrorists, or that theism promotes violence.

Some more examples:

All cows in Australia are brown.
All cats have tails
All seeds grow into plants. 
Snakes are venemous.

freediver wrote on Nov 26^th, 2008 at 12:18pm:


There are various ways we can test historical facts. Independant sources are useful. Some things are more factual than others. Napolean definitely existed, and that he was French / Corsican .

However to say that "worked hard to heal the wounds of over a decade of revolution" is probably true, but it's subjective. To say that he was a "power hungry megalamaniac" is equally subjective.

I don't know if all history is factual. Who was it that said that history is written by the Victors? (was it really?) Maybe some of it is. There was a bright supernova recorded by Chinese and Arab astronomers in 1054. The evidence for this is the crab nebula.

There is a kind of universal standard for what is absolutely factual.

freediver wrote on Nov 26^th, 2008 at 12:18pm:


Let's suppose that you buy lunch and you pay with a $50 note. The server gives you change for $20, believing that you gave him that. Would you say that oh well - he believed it was a $20 - maybe he was right?

If you gave him a $50, that's an absolute fact (you might believe that it was a $100 but that's irrelevant because in fact it was a $50) It's a  fact - nothing to do with belief. It doesn't matter how hard you believe, you can't turn your $50 into a $100.

In that case, you can say he believed it was a $20 but it was a $50 (with reference to reality - not to any belief), but you can't say that he knows it was a $20 but it wasn't so. Know implies fact.

In this case there are three options provided- It's a 20, a 50 or a 100.  Only one of these options is factual, regardless of what anyone happens to believe.  

Reality does not change according to belief. There is only one reality shared by everybody. Reality is a universal truth.

Not All cows in Australia are brown.
Not All cats have tails
Not All seeds grow into plants. 
Not All Snakes are venemous.
Not All theists devoted to their religion.
So atheism is just another religion.

In fact there is an opinion that Homo sapiens sapiens actualy is Homo sapiens religious. Have a look at the link I gave in the fridge about First organised religion ever.

Doesn't that distinction fall apart as soon as the truth is unknown? That is why you only give examples where the truth is readily apparent.

freediver wrote on Nov 26^th, 2008 at 1:53pm:


It doesn't matter if the truth is unknown. The truth is out there It still exists whether we know what it is or not.  That's the basis of science.

If you lose a coin in the ocean, nobody might know where it is exactly, but the fact that it's somewhere in the ocean is true, and the fact that it occupies one unique location the size of a coin within the ocean is true regardless of what anyone thinks.

There is a unique unchangeable truth related to reality.  

Either a Christian God exists or it doesn't. The fact that both cannot be true is another example of truth.

freediver wrote on Nov 26^th, 2008 at 1:58pm:


Correct. I never said that you can. I'm just saying that some things are factual.