Do facts exist, Sup Forums? Please discuss? i have been hearing this word thrown around quite a bit lately...

Do facts exist, Sup Forums? Please discuss? i have been hearing this word thrown around quite a bit lately, mainly in the media, (obviously), but I'm not sure if this word has ever had any true merit.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=skvnj67YGmw
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

very good, congratulations on not being retarded

I wish I could give you something

Yes, facts do exist. A fact is just some piece of evidence, observation, or experimental outcome. But you have to be careful because some people will make up things and call them facts or use a fact to justify a non fact with very loose reasoning.

> A fact is just some piece of evidence, observation, or experimental outcome

what happens when your life long observations are proven wrong in just a second? I am not trying to invalidate science of anything, but I get OP's point

a fact will never truly exist because it will never be truly objective, you would have to somehow analyze the universe from "the outside" in other to be objective, and since we are a part of said universe, our facts will always be subjective in a way, even the most proven and repetitive thing.

2 + 2 = 4
Traps are gay
Shaun King is White

A
hang on, leaf was right

I am also not saying logic is invalid, I am just pointing out that, subjectivity is unavoidable

"There are no facts, only intepretations." -Friedrich Nietzsche

thank you.. i think that is the most that we humans can say on the matter
i am thinking about your post as i type this, yet i am still struggling to fully understand what you mean. i have grown up to believe "fact" is undisputable (sp)? info about a topic. therefore, i have come to believe nothing political could possibly be fact. number can possibly be fact, but how can we connect that to politics?

That is my question.
How can we put numbers to politics which are by nature fueled by emotion, ideas, and shit like that?
Please excuse me. I am drunk, new to posting on Sup Forums etc...

you mean like being a tripfaggot for no apparent reason?
why user? why?

The shortest distance between two points is always a straight line. Get fukt op

I have news for you.....

what the fuck do you mean by this? what a false equivalency! is this what Sup Forums is?

What if there's a wall between them?

then the shortest route between guadalahara and san fran is via vancouver

youtube.com/watch?v=skvnj67YGmw

normie youtuber still correct thought

granted, this works in relation to an environment and a system, like gravity and friction and air, in a pure vacuum with no forces being exerted whatsoever, I think a straight line is the closest. (without taking a wormhole or something like that).

AND its time, not distance, but,,,,,space time......idk...fuck me

no. he isnt.
pick two points on the surface on a sphere, or a toroid, i dont care
draw line between these points
thats the shortest route

no no you are right, that was the shortest time, not distance, i am a idiot

Almost everyone's basic observations are correct (unless they are a fucking crazy person), the issue is when they try to extend these observations with bad logic.

Welcome to observer bias hell.

and the fastest is not the straight because of the medium and the forces acting on the object, in pure vacuum i think the fastest route would also be the shortest

Or more commonly, they make a bunch of observations at once and erroneously combine them and view them as one phenomena.

how about mode of transportation? can't these things be open to subjectivity due to the earth's geography?
it is very hard to argue with you, due to the technology of our race, yet, through this, shouldn't we see that humans only know fact through technology? and is technology nothing? what is electricity besides human discovery though invention?

Once again, i am drunk and a first time Sup Forums poster. i apologize. don't fucking hate me. i want to be redpilled

you were correct last time
you are an idiot
youre confusing simple geometry with more complex systems
example
the shirtest route between whatever the fuck the capital of costa rica and say, berlin, is a straight line
its isnt the fastest route, but it is the shortest distance

no. youre an idiot too

SJO, the capital

If enough people that matter believe it as fact then its fact, and that's a fact.

premise - shortest distance between two points is a straight line - geometrically 100% correct
premise 2 - shortest route betwwen two points is a straight line - obvious fucktardery because its shifiting the goalposts

no one cares tripfaggot

customtripfag

just a question. where are you getting your information from, and do you 100% trust the source? do you trust the source to believe it as fact?
i know that the shortest between two points is a straight line. where i was more directing the question is.... how is fact related to politics? if it is a purely mathematical thing.. how can it even be used in politics?

test

so now we get to the bones of the problem
you must be under 25 if you think you can use 'fact' and 'politics' in the same sentence
thats why it's fun

you win. you haven't used any politics in your posts, only mathematically sound "fact". yet, i still don't buy it. math is nothing to anything but humans on earth. that is my final argument. if you beat that, i concede.

it's not a matter of winning. 2
+2 will always =4
what you're asking for is a redpill. and it's a simple one to swallow
DISCRIMINATION
it's all there in one word
discrimination is PRECISELY what separates humans from lower species

why did you bring discrimination up? 2+2=4, i agree, but what can humans get from that, besides benefit to humans? by your post, it seems you are suggesting that lesser humans can't understand math. i was never asking anything of the sort.
but yes, i am asking for a redpill. i don't think i'll be finding it here unless you can enlighten me. i don't think you can. not an insult towards you.

but more likely than not, we are misunderstanding each others arguments.

how do you define 'discrimination'?
below are a few variants.
I'm betting most NEET burgers only know no. 1

"NEET burger" is hardly a relevant word anymore. Us grand Americans have been rejecting unhealthy foods for a decade.
As to the more important topic.. being fact... it doesn't seem that you are discussing it anymore..
Am I too foolish to see this British logic?
Or are you scrambling to find answers through definition?

no. dingbat
in maths, you use cold hard rules. it spretty straight forward
in matters social and political, one needs to discriminate.
its really very simple
>niggers and sand niggers are probably best kept out of white society
-apply some cold logic and some discrimination (.i.e. discerning whats hyperbole from a half truth or a newly minted (((fact))), and you have your answers)
if you cant decide what is fact, apply 'Occam's'.

To me, objective truth is made up of shared observations that stay consistent. For example, A catatonic LSD user can still be affected by external forces, even if they're busy perceiving their own reality at the time. Shared observation is also inherent to our existence, because since we can observe others' consciousness through communication, it means that their capacity for observation exists within our personal reality.

So even if there is only one true consciousness in existence it doesn't matter, because it contains multiple observers so the effect is the same.

Dude are inches facts lmao? Amounts and ratios exist. That's all the facts you need everything else follows.

...

no, you fucking british fuck
you are taking the topic away from where i was trying to lead it in the first place.

there are no cold hard rules in math because it will always be human construct. as to matters social and political, they do not matter. nor does math. this is the essence of why i started the thread. there is no fact because there is no math, or anything, it's all a fabrication of humans from nothing.
And now you are using terms I am not familiar with like "Occam'm'".
The truth is, I can't argue with you because I am probably not smart enough.

FUCK! I AM SO FUCKING MAD

>maths is a human contstruct
nigger detected

how is math not a human construct? i am just talking out of my ass now. but honestly., how could math not be created by human? is it some kind of divine thing?

the ratio of a circles circumference to it's diameter doesnt change because we figured it out

two trees in a paddock doesnt stop numbering two, just cos some dumb nigger cant count

if Mbuto 'kwa Edglord has three municipalities, each with 2,000 villagers in each, and decimates them, how many superyachts did he claim in tax?

there are constants in life user
one plus one usually equals two
two plus two equals four
any more than three niggers is a riot

Facts are a social construct.

California is a socialist... i mean... um

I unironically think math is god metaphorically

so God is in the digits..
you couldd blow me down with feather

Facts exist, a truth does not care if you believe it or not, it doesn't stop being true because people don't believe it.

People just like about what facts are a lot.

>immediately detects nigger
>thinks his arguments deserve the slightest bit of thought

Facts do exist. Pure logic is the obvious simple proof of that.

Facts are all about definitions. Without logical and proper definitions, there are no facts.

>muh metaphysics 101

sort of.

>the sky is blue
well this is a fact, I know it, you know it. Sun's radiation bounces around the atmosphere and produces a blue hue, nobody is going to argue unless they're being a cunt which leads us to
>the sky is not blue
Because it's black, or grey, or some kind of midnight shit. The sky is never a single color, etc.

'Facts' as we know them are really just memes that closely ally with objective Truth.

For instance, as a 'Truth' we can say, "I perceive a lamp before me"
As a fact we can say, "there is a lamp over there".
The difference being one describes in objective honesty what they experienced, regardless of implication, and the other asserts that their perception is objective and therefore what they experienced must be truth.

if I see a blue sky I can say the sky appears blue.
But to say that there DEFINITELY is a sky and it is DEFINITELY blue is a meme, because we can't really define the sky and we can't really define 'blue' outside of our own perception.

I know it's not insanely clear but basically there are few objective truths and most facts are a generalization that comes close.