causation (Introduction)

by GateKeeper , Saturday, May 31, 2014, 02:33 (3618 days ago) @ romansh
edited by unknown, Saturday, May 31, 2014, 02:41

truth is like how your monism fits the conclusion of "god". I think that is cool. Observation matches conclusion. It is as true as it can be. Until we have more evidence. then it may be "more true" or "less true". its not 'untrue" today.-"yeah, so what ... ". so what, is just that. they are all "more real" than "fake" . You could stop at "yeah". .-err. you brought up a current legal system rom. Why? I mean we are using it, that's empirical. And we should keep trying to make it better. So I am lost to your point there. Politics and science don't mix. I wish they did really. -Science is observation and data collection. Scientist draw the conclusions on that data. Again, science and scientist is like Accounting and accountant. I explained why I like to make that clear. I don't think it is unreasonable. can you explain why you think it is? or at seems to like that too me?-a crime" to be wrong? Again, you are somewhere I am not. I explained that being wrong is GREAT to me. So what do you mean?-"proof". you only have "disproof". I know that don't I. You have "nothing is "real". I have "if it is all fake, then what we have is as real as it gets". That is scary, I understand.