Here goes….
Theories are unsure concepts or structure of ideas which might be true. They are dynamic (denoting movement), therefore, in continuous advancement.
Facts are the current universal data of certainty thus are objectively and undeniably true. They are static (denoting immobility), therefore, there is ‘no advancement in the world of fact’.
For this reason, facts oppose the advancement of theory in the same way as static objects oppose dynamic movement.
I write and translate technical literature, therefore, my life revolves around the writings of others (books, reports, abtracts, etc.), which although precious to my research, I read with due interest but no passion. However, I believe I know why you chose to mention Kuhn…because his theories have particular relevance to circular arguments, right?…mmmm…I need time to think whether I should be offended or not…”Rupert walkies!”

Report abuse

It is an excellent book. I’m interested to know what do you make of Thomas Kuhn’s work in relation to paragraphs 2 and 3 in your post #94. Also, I don’t understand what you mean by ‘facts are actually opposed to theories/opinions and hence not interrelated’.

Ah, yet another thread that only I and someone else is reading!

Report abuse

I’m overwhelmed! What a strange coincidence that you should mention that particular book, which I came across (and read with due interest) while I was translating a report on Thermodynamics…it was actually a chapter from ‘What is this thing called Science’ (relating to causal laws) which inspired my example! Thank you all the same.

Report abuse

I can recommend an excellent book on these issues called ‘What is this thing called science’ by Alan Chalmers.

Report abuse

I can’t agree with you with regard to the interrelation between facts and opinions, simply because facts are actually opposed to theories/opinions and hence not interrelated.

However, IT IS possible to discuss and form/change opinions relating to the philosophical and formal accounts of facts and their effects…but even so, in all cases, we cannot alter the facts.

For example, it is a fact that water is the only natural substance that is found in all three states, liquid, solid and gas.
Can we oppose/alter this fact? Of course we can’t, simply because it is a fact.

Having said that, I agree that (especially under these circumstances) it’s far more beneficial to spread facts rather than theories…hold on a minute, can a theory be considered a suspicion?…mmmm…I’ll get back to you on that one, because if I don’t take the dog out right away, he’ll commit a ‘faux pas’ in the sitting room…and that’s a FACT!

Report abuse

Sorry for the confusion. I was talking about all forums rather than this one in particular.

I wish I felt facts were as black and white as you feel they are!

While I agree broadly with your final paragraph, it must be remembered that facts and opinions are (or at least should be) interrelated. The former should underpin the latter. If you start off with the incorrect facts, how can you possibly formulate a valid opinion?

Report abuse

Thanks for the boost you have given me I can give as much muck back to undesibles but some of them go too far and in their heads they are always right and everyone else wrong.I will just ignore them in future.

Report abuse

As far as I can remember (without reading all the posts again), no-one has openly questioned any FACTS presented on this thread.
And before you start, FACTS are hard truths, supported by proof that verifies a conclusion which in turn reveals reality…all of which leave no room for perspective.
However, many comments on this thread contradict perspective (which is a matter of opinion) and not untruth (which is a divergence from fact). And whilst I am most interested to read differences in opinion (I find a good debate compelling), I feel views should be argued with intelligence and not derision…after all, it’s only good manners.

Report abuse

While I agree that ’snide and nasty’ remarks are totally unacceptable, many people on this forum regard any contradiction of their ‘facts’ or analysis as a personal affront.

As you say, debate is healthy. Unfortunately, many posters (you know who you are!) post on this website without having the faintest idea what they’re talking about. Some of the comments above in relation to immunology show this, eg ‘the over use of antibiotics …can lead to inflamatory bowel disease’. Fortunately, 85 per cent of Jersey schoolchildren have been vaccinated despite all the misinformation.

This is a public forum. Uncorrected ‘facts’ are read and repeated. Posters should remember this.

Report abuse

Report abuse

Report abuse

I don’t believe in forcing people at all, but those that do not take the vaccine MUST understand that they potentially put others at risk and must act accordingly (i.e. being extremely cautious should they suffer any symptoms at all). I don’t believe this happens in life, everyone puts the dollar signs first now.

74, I do have concerns over what doctors and scientists can get away with, and I say that as a scientist. Too many abuse the title. But actually all it needs for that situation to be corrected is for the public to stop thinking that scientists are God (and some clearly do). Don’t believe everything they tell you because they’re human and they are every bit as susceptible to being woo’d by the media, following the dollar signs, and to having ulterior motives. They’re a human first and foremost, and a scientist/doctor second!

Report abuse

Magnolia Man (and others you know who you are) – you do often make snide and nasty remarks about the comments and opinions of others and there is absolutely no need. This is supposed to be a forum whereby individuals can express their comments about the articles and subjects free from all that. Please respect that people have opinions that are sometimes different from your own as they respect your opinions and comments.

Debate is part of a healthy society and often leads to exchanges of information which enable people to learn more about a subject. Just please be a little bit more respectful when presenting your counter arguments and comments in future!

Report abuse

You’re quite right, differences of opinion are part and parcel of a discussion.
But your comment (54) sounded as if you were questioning Bella’s understanding of the topic, therefore, somewhat offensive.
Having to present one’s personal vision of an organization such as the W.H.O. requires pages not lines, so I’m surprised Bella answered at all.
By the way, in 58 I spelt ’symptoms’ without the ‘P’ and you didn’t correct me…am I to assume that you couldn’t be bothered checking my posts?

Report abuse

A public debate?
No way 4 or 5 banging the same questions at me is not a debate.
Trying to belittle me and insinuating i am an idiot.
No contest.
I will not have a debate with people who are trying to ridicule me.

i,d rather just not have a discussion with these individuals at all.

I don,t try and bring others down with snide and uncalled for nasty remarks and expect to be treated the same.

I suuppose it makes them feel better.

Go ahead and find some-one else to have a go at,if it makes you feel better.

Report abuse