From: stumper 

Ray Fischer wrote:
> stumper   wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Geoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you know what is society?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you prove its existence?
>>>>>>>>>>> The existence of society is
manifest. Once again, proof is for
mathematics
>>>>>>>>>>> and moonshiners. Sorry you
can't get that through your dense skull.
You
>>>>>>>>>>> probably have difficulty with
the middle three activities I
mentioned above.
>>>>>>>>>> Actually you are using a private language.
>>>>>>>>> Actually you are in idiot.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are not writing a private journal here.
>>>>>>>>>> You need to figure out the usage
other people are using.
>>>>>>>>> YOu need to stop babbling childish nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When in doubt, just Google
"scientific proof."
>>>>>>>>>> It gets 828,000 hits.
>>>>>>>>> And "alien abduction" gets
over a million.
>>>>>>>> Are you saying that such phenomena do not exist?
>>>>>>> Yep.  There is no evidence that alien
abduction actually exists.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You have lost this argument long time ago.
>>>>>>>> Get over it soon.
>>>>>>> You really are quite the arrogant idiot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> proof (SHOWING TRUTH)
>>>>>>>> noun [C or U]
>>>>>>>> a fact or piece of information which shows
that something exists or is
true:
>>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org
>>>>>>>     "Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     "We publish dictionaries for people
learning English all over the
>>>>>>>     world."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you speak English?
>>>>>>> Better than you.  I don't need a learner's dictionary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's a better definition.  I'm not going to
give the defintion from
>>>>>>> the OED because I don't feel like typing it
in, so this one will have
>>>>>>> to suffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Function:   noun
>>>>>>>     Etymology:  Middle English prof, prove,
alteration of preve, from
>>>>>>>     Anglo-French preove, from Late Latin
proba, from Latin probare to
>>>>>>>     prove -- more at PROVE
>>>>>>>     1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels
acceptance by the mind
>>>>>>>     of a truth or a fact b : the process or an
instance of
>>>>>>>     establishing the validity of a statement
especially by derivation
>>>>>>>     from other statements in accordance with
principles of reasoning
>>>>>>>     2 obsolete : EXPERIENCE
>>>>>>>     3 : something that induces certainty or
establishes validity
>>>>>>>     4 archaic : the quality or state of having
been tested or tried;
>>>>>>>     especially : unyielding hardness
>>>>>>>     5 : evidence operating to determine the
finding or judgment of a
>>>>>>>     tribunal
>>>>>>>     6 a plural proofs or proof : a copy (as of
typeset text) made for
>>>>>>>     examination or correction b : a test
impression of an engraving,
>>>>>>>     etching, or lithograph c : a coin that is
struck from a highly
>>>>>>>     polished die on a polished planchet, is
not intended for
>>>>>>>     circulation, and sometimes differs in
metallic content from coins
>>>>>>>     of identical design struck for circulation
d : a test photographic
>>>>>>>     print made from a negative
>>>>>>>     7 : a test applied to articles or
substances to determine whether
>>>>>>>     they are of standard or satisfactory quality
>>>>>>>     8 a : the minimum alcoholic strength of
proof spirit b : strength
>>>>>>>     with reference to the standard for proof
spirit; specifically :
>>>>>>>     alcoholic strength indicated by a number
that is twice the percent
>>>>>>>     by volume of alcohol present >>>>>>     alcohol>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're trying to apply definition 1b to the
fields of science where it
>>>>>>> clearly doesn't apply because science depends
upon EVIDENCE while your
>>>>>>> notion of proof depends upon reason.  Not even
1a applies because
>>>>>>> science is always looking for alternate or
better explanations for
>>>>>>> observed phenomena.
>>>>>> Even though it was decades ago,
>>>>>> I majored in the philosophy of science
>>>>> Quelle surprise!
>>>>>
>>>>>> in the best university of the country, dear.
>>>>> And I have an BS and and MS, the latter from a better
university.
>>>>> And still you debate like a college sophomore.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Your private usage means nothing to me.
>>>>> Now you're lying.  I didn't provide a "private" usage.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can science prove that the earth exists?
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can science prove that the universe exists?
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>> Do you believe the universe exists?
>>>>> Irrelevant.
>>>> Philosophy is not science, dear.
>>> It's not as useful and it has the effect of convincing morons that
>>> they might have some ability to think.
>> Philosophy is necessary to put mad scientists
>> in their proper position of ignorance.
>
> The usual bluster of the intellectually-challenged.
>
> Meanwhile we all notice that you're using the products of science to
> show everybody what a childish wanker you are.
>


Do you mind?
After all, science came from philosophy.

--
~Stumper

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag