You were complaining about anti-intellectuals just now, right? :D
Discussion
You know exactly what he means or … maybe you don’t? 🤷♂️ in which case I dgaf 🤣
Entertaining nonsense isn't the mark or an intellectual. Just because that nonsense is in a book doesn't give it validity. There are lots of books that are pure rubbish. This is exactly the sort of fallacious reasoning I'm talking about. It's ignorance masquerading as wisdom.
Dismissing nonsense using evidence and logic is the mark of an intellectual.
And so is being mindful that one many be wrong, or at least no more correct than another.
Non-intellectuals resort to assertions, fallacies, and Community Notes.
Do I have be mindful that maybe 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4? Or is that absurd? And if someone wrote a book making that claim, would I have to suspend judgement until I thoroughly investigated their argument? No! Because there is no argument that ends with the notion of 2+2 equaling anything other than 4.
2 + 2 equals 4 by definition, for the set of real numbers.
There are other mathematical domains where addition has different properties. Some of these are useful, and used in cryptography.
I could argue: 2+2=4 is only an anlogy that works in our macroscopic observable world. Numbers are just an invention of humans to describe what say are observing. But in a quantum world where everything is uncertain (to our minds) we actually don’t know if terms like this make really sense.
The problem is, there is no way to proof that 2+2=4. But the fact we haven’t found a way to proof it wrong makes it a very likely assumption.
Actually in the very basis it’s „not even wrong“
My hot take on this:
Observation and hypotheses support a fact.
A fact then exists until observation and hypotheses disprove the fact in a robust replicable, and rational scientific manner (generally by people far more educated than me).
Until then a fact is a fact.
Beliefs do not come into this argument.
Beliefs are based on attitudes and thoughts. Our thoughts are limitless and not bound by science, or even right and wrong. (For example I think I look great dancing… factually that is unlikely to be the case especially if I have been drinking alcohol)
Philosophically speaking there is no single truth, there are no simple facts and everything can exist everywhere all at once based on arguments and theories, including the possibility that we could be living in a universe that resides in a God’s navel. (Also potentially true of quantum mechanics and someone more knowledgeable on the subject than me, may have a much more eloquent view. Ditto re philosophy, and the scientific method).
I wasn’t expecting this kind of discussion when I Nostr’ed today but I’m here for it!! 🤩
That’s the great thing about nostr. It is what people are doing with it, so it can be anything. News, memes, philosophy….
I see it a bit critical to say sth is a fact until someone proofs it’s not. That would mean the definition of a fact is just the best assumption we have.
But I guess most people understand a fact as something that is 100% true.
So this could cause a lot of misunderstanding.
Sure this is just a discussion about naming/definition. Anyhow I am avoiding the word fact in general.
I would say we can‘t find THE truth (e.g. we could still live in a simulation) but we can find facts according to specific assumptions.
And some assumptions are so deep connected to our society that we don‘t even mention these assumptions.
That’s why in sience it is common to use sayings like „according to einsteins theory of relativitiy“
You're misusing "anti-intellectual" to support your fallacious arguments. It doesn't mean what you're implying. Please, just stop with crap. There's no reason to continue arguing this novel idea. You're not going to present a case that compells me to reconsider the notion of objective truth. So, there's no point in continuing.