2007-07-05 10:42:26 · 28 answers · asked by The Church Lady 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Science damn you and your accursed logic, fiend!
2007-07-05 10:45:19 · answer #1 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Good point church lady. However, how can any facts be proven without logic, statistics, math, or science? By definition, if something is proven through the scientific method, that makes it a scientific fact.
2007-07-05 17:48:19 · answer #2 · answered by razzthedestroyer 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
'Fraid not. At most it's a slightly clumsy expression. "Scientific facts" is the name given to those things that can be deemed to be accurate and predictable by scientific method, to the best of our current understanding. Therefore it is emphatically true that scientific facts can be proven scientifically...if they couldn't, they wouldn't be described as scientific facts.
The important thing to remember here is that the scientific definition of a fact allows, always, for the idea that the basic of our understanding may not be total, and so scientific facts are open to amendment as new scientific processes are discovered and described. This openness to change is how we distinguish scientific facts from dogmatic facts, which are those things that are described as proven DESPITE scientific processes, or indeed evidentiary ones.
2007-07-05 19:17:10 · answer #3 · answered by mdfalco71 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not at all. In science the use of proven facts are used to prove or disprove others. The conclusion is reached via the facts. Religion, however, is the opposite. It begins with a conclusion or assumption and then seeks out rationals to support it. In the end the only foundation for religion is faith, which is completely devoid of fact.
2007-07-05 17:54:20 · answer #4 · answered by Rance D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In order for something to be called a fact in science. It must become a law. It starts out as a hypothesis. Then when experimentation is done it may become a theory. Once the theory is grounded. Then the scientists have to prove their statement by having peers review it and test it. If when they do the experiments the same result happens time and time again by anyone who does the experiment then it may be called a law. If one istance of the staement doesn't hold true then it doesn't become or stay a law. A law is testable and holds under all circumstances.
2007-07-05 17:56:04 · answer #5 · answered by Deslok of Gammalon 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's a scientific fact WHEN it's proven scientifically.
2007-07-05 17:51:44 · answer #6 · answered by Citizen Justin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it is not... for anyone... Facts (scientific or otherwise) can be tested by the "scientific" method, which is nothing more than setting up expierments to see if the "fact" actually proves to be true.
2007-07-05 17:50:33 · answer #7 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have you actually established that circular logic is, in fact, circular, before posing such a question?
There are alternate elliptical and helical notions to be considered, after all...
Might be tautology, of course.
2007-07-05 17:51:33 · answer #8 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily. The notion of proving something scientifically arises out of the process of subjecting the subject to rigourous, repeatable tests. It's a description of a method used.
2007-07-05 17:45:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
But it is not circular logic to say that facts can be proven scientifically.
2007-07-05 17:44:59 · answer #10 · answered by Mystine G 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I like the devilutionist title. I do love your questions :)
2007-07-05 18:00:39 · answer #11 · answered by meissen97 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋