XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: j@j.j   
      
   "Lewis"  wrote in message   
   news:slrnloqgbm.dp.g.kreme@amelia.local...   
   > In message    
   >  Paul S  Person  wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 10:51:08 +0000 (UTC), Lewis   
   >>  wrote:   
   >   
   >>>In message    
   >>>  Paul S  Person  wrote:   
   >>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 13:38:56 +0200, Taemon  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>>It is not a fact, no. It just isn't something to take into account, and   
   >>>>>there are very good reasons for that. Like the Celestial Teapot, the   
   >>>>>Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, you MUST have had this   
   >>>>>discussion before.   
   >>>   
   >>>> I have had similar discussions before and, if one of them was with   
   >>>> you, feel free to drop out of this one. No point in rehashing the   
   >>>> past.   
   >>>   
   >>>> I think a bit of concreteness might help: all I am really trying to   
   >>>> say is that your prior statement that you "know that magic doesn't   
   >>>> exist" would, given its nature as a non-falsifiable statement, have   
   >>>> been more clearly (and so arguably better) put as "believe that magic   
   >>>> doesn't exist" (modifying "believe" with whatever adverbs, such as   
   >>>> "strongly", "definitely", "deeply", and so on you feel appropriate).   
   >>>   
   >>>Nope. 100% wrong. He does not *believe* that magic doesn't exist, just   
   >>>as I don't *believe* that it doesn't exist. It does not exist. Period.   
   >>>That is a simple fact, no belief necessary.   
   >   
   >> He (Taemon) has, in fact, clearly stated that, for him, "magic does   
   >> not exist" is a non-falsifiable statement. He was offered a choice of   
   >> four categories, the first of which is the one you have picked -- and   
   >> he did not. I think Taemon knows what his position on this statement   
   >> is far better than you do.   
   >   
   > It doesn't matter what his position is, facts are facts and belief is   
   > meaningless.   
   >   
   >>>Now, if someone were to come along and prove that magic *did* exist,   
   >>>then I would no longer know that magic does not exist, I would know that   
   >>>magic *does* exist.   
   >   
   >> That is not how facts work. A fact is a fact is a fact. It can neither   
   >> be proven nor falsified, but is simply known to be true.   
   >   
   > That is so completely absurd I don't know where to begin.   
   >   
   >> Another way to look at it: factual statements cannot be proven,   
   >> falsified, or believed. They are the statements that everybody accepts   
   >> and so nobody cares to debate. The pool of facts is subject to   
   >> fluctuation over time, although with the movement from handwritten   
   >> records to printed records to computers the longevity of a fact is   
   >> likely to improve.   
   >   
   > Utter crap. "God does not exist" is a factual statement that most people   
   > would not accept; it's still a fact.   
   >   
   But that is also utter crap, because I can state as a fact that "God does   
   exist" just as easily as you can, and it's still a fact   
      
   > --   
   > It was a fifty-four with a mashed up door and a cheesy little amp with a   
   > sign on the front said "Fender Champ" and a second-hand guitar it was a   
   > Stratocaster with a whammy bar   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)