causation (Introduction)

by romansh , Saturday, May 31, 2014, 01:49 (3611 days ago) @ David Turell

Romansh: In science I don't accept proof; I accept evidence. Science does not reach the truth. I have been saying this all along.
> 
> Fair enough. Evidence then becomes a scaffolding on which we build more and more knowledge about the reality in which we live. But that sounds shakey to me. At what point do you accept the idea that the evidence is solid enough to view as factual, or is there always a doubt? Do enough confirmatory studies suffice? For you are there any truths?-Newton's laws are a reasonable approximation, for the most part, of everyday life. I can accept that as a so called fact. They have been "proven" as a reasonable approximation, though we know there are better (more accurate) models for our observations.-Our observations might be considered facts ... but there is always uncertainty with observations. -At work people talk about processes that have been proven, ie used successfully for a century or so. What they mean they have been demonstrated. The next ore we find or concentrate we buy might not be amenable to the process.