I guess we just don't agree on this.
Proof helps illuminate "truth", I think, only in topic areas which are resolvable without fuzzy logic.

Proof independent of prefererences and context only works at the most specific levels of math and physics and chemistry.
Persons also "know" other information, they think, but I'm saying that most of what folks think they know is just CBS conspiracy feudal Turkish empire nonsense entertainment ( or .. or .. or )

If you think you know something without following the procedure I outlined above, you are only talking about specific levels of math and physics and chemistry.

Do we disagree on that?

Sorry you had to fly off the handle like that.:)
Mike

• I meant "fuzzy weighted averages" etc. - kantolfir2 - July 12, 2002 - 05:34 UTC
  • Proof is definitely overrated - pmartin - July 12, 2002 - 16:12 UTC
    • I disagree that we don't agree and agree that we don't disagree - carefuluniverse - July 13, 2002 - 03:43 UTC
      • I agree. (nt) - pmartin - July 13, 2002 - 17:59 UTC
    • Power is not necessarily knowledge - carefuluniverse - July 13, 2002 - 20:30 UTC
      • Then we need another word for it - pmartin - July 14, 2002 - 02:23 UTC
        • My Neologizer is on the bindimch right now, so.... - carefuluniverse - July 14, 2002 - 03:28 UTC
          • Boredom and Knowledge - pmartin - July 14, 2002 - 05:48 UTC