Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[
So using this example (line above) it shows a case where it can be a fact for someone (Mystic) but not a fact for everyone (those who consider anecdotes to be unsubstantiated claims but NOT to be facts.)
That illustrates and confirms the point I was trying to make about the problems that occur in using the words "true" and "fact"; and seeking to recognize and clarify the distinction between not just a fact and a belief view opinion. But also between fact for you or fact for everyone.
If it is a fact that M experienced X, then is a fact (for everyone) that M experienced X. The problem is epistemology. M can know with certainty that M experienced X, but the rest of us cannot know with certainty exactly what M subjectively experienced.
There can also be issues of interpretation. M interprets X as an experience of Jesus, and he can feel certain that it was Jesus. But since it is logically possible for interpretations to be wrong, M cannot really be certain that it was, in fact, really Jesus. He can only be certain that the experience felt to him like it certainly was Jesus.
The meaning of an experience is always an interpretation, and interpretations can be wrong. If it is a fact that M interpreted X as being Jesus, then it is a fact for everyone that M interpreted X as being Jesus. But that doesn't imply that X really met Jesus. All any of us can say is that M had an experience that he sincerely believes was an experience of encountering Jesus. Believing with certainty that it was Jesus does not necessarily make it a fact that it was actually Jesus.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 10-28-2018 at 01:15 PM..
If it is a fact that M experienced X, then is a fact (for everyone) that M experienced X. The problem is epistemology. M can know with certainty that M experienced X, but the rest of us cannot know with certainty exactly what M subjectively experienced.
No it is not a fact for everyone because people have different criteria for how and when they use the word fact, and what they claim is or is not a fact.
We have seen on this thread alone in a very short time people say it can't be a fact because:
"Mind plays tricks" "unsubstantiated claim" "wishful thinking" "anyone can say anything" "no proof no evidence" "not verified or repeatable" "emotional need loneliness ignorance" "magic superstition fairy tale delusion" "personal anecdote" "you wanted something to happen so convinced yourself it did" "facts are backed by scientific method" "facts hold up in court of law" "
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-28-2018 at 01:35 PM..
I would take it as given that each of us determines our personal experiences to be fact unless otherwise shown some reason(s) to doubt them.
No as we've seen people use fact very differently. And your criteria for what is a fact does not meet their criteria for what is a fact.
See post just above #4322 for why many disagree with you and do NOT consider personal experiences to be "fact."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
...people say it can't be a fact because:
"Mind plays tricks" "unsubstantiated claim" "wishful thinking" "anyone can say anything" "no proof no evidence" "not verified or repeatable" "emotional need loneliness ignorance" "magic superstition fairy tale delusion" "personal anecdote" "you wanted something to happen so convinced yourself it did" "facts are backed by scientific method" "facts hold up in court of law"
I will also point out to you MPD that what you call "fact" when it happens to you, when it is related by others, you derisively label tbe very same type of events as "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense." Please be aware of this.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-28-2018 at 02:02 PM..
[Final line removed since not looking at interpretation at this point just the occurrence of event]
So using this example (line above) it shows a case where it can be a fact for someone (Mystic) but not a fact for everyone (those who consider anecdotes to be unsubstantiated claims but NOT to be facts.)
That illustrates and confirms the point I was trying to make about the problems that occur in using the words "true" and "fact"; and seeking to recognize and clarify the distinction between not just a "fact" and a "belief view opinion." But also between "fact for someone" may not be "fact for everyone."
And this is where you are wrong: Mystic either had an event or he did not regardless of whether anyone believes it.
I will also point out to you MPD that what you call "fact" when it happens to you when it is related by others, you derisively label the very same type of events as "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense." Please be aware of this.
No, I do not. I accept personal experiences but as I said, we can disagree about what the experience IS. What I call "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense" are hearsay that relates things that are patently NOT possible or are primitive and barbaric in content.
No, I do not. I accept personal experiences but as I said, we can disagree about what the experience IS. What I call "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense" are hearsay that relates things that are patently NOT possible or are primitive and barbaric in content.
your "event" is considered by a whole lot of people on this forum to be the very same "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense" that you deride others for.
i'm not talking about interpretations or meanings. i am talking about your response to others. your claims are "fact" according to you, and yet when others share, you call it "hearsay" "things that are patently NOT possible" and ""magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense"
Yes. and yes again. you do this.
it is a glaring double standard.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-28-2018 at 02:44 PM..
No, I do not. I accept personal experiences but as I said, we can disagree about what the experience IS. What I call "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense" are hearsay that relates things that are patently NOT possible or are primitive and barbaric in content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
your "event" is considered by a whole lot of people on this forum to be the very same "magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense" that you deride others for.
i'm not talking about interpretations or meanings. i am talking about your response to others. your claims are "fact" according to you, and yet when others share, you call it "hearsay" "things that are patently NOT possible" and ""magic superstition primitive ignorant nonsense"
Yes. and yes again. you do this.
it is a glaring double standard.
No, I do NOT. I accept personal EXPERIENCES as fact for the person having the experiences. But NOT STORIES about OTHER peoples' experiences, especially when they violate known laws of our reality or impute some magical outcome or reflect primitive and barbaric content.
No, I do NOT. I accept personal EXPERIENCES as fact for the person having the experiences. But NOT STORIES about OTHER peoples' experiences, especially when they violate known laws of our reality or impute some magical outcome or reflect primitive and barbaric content.
to many people, that precisely describes your claimed "event."
magical. primitive. barbaric. campfire story. fairy tale. out of date. humanity has evolved beyond the fiction of "God." invented by men thousands of years ago. no need for a blankie in this modern age. childish. like Santa Claus or leprechauns. outdated. old mouldy superstition. from goatherders who poop in the ground. no cell phones then. there are cell phones now and quantum physics. so no sky daddy needed. your event was just a bunch of chemicals in the brain. taking hallucinogens causes the same parts of your brain to light up. no god needed. increase your science literacy.
that is how many many MANY people view your claimed "event"
and that is what you and others continue to tell people who may hold different beliefs than you in "religion and spirituality."
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-28-2018 at 03:19 PM..
No, I do NOT. I accept personal EXPERIENCES as fact for the person having the experiences. But NOT STORIES about OTHER peoples' experiences, especially when they violate known laws of our reality or impute some magical outcome or reflect primitive and barbaric content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
to many people that precisely describes your claimed "event."
No it does NOT. How other people see my personal EXPERIENCES is not the issue. I do NOT disparage personal EXPERIENCES. It is STORIES that are NOT the direct personal experiences of the storyteller that present the problems and can deserve the adjectives you mistakenly apply to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
