What is the difference between knowing and believing?

  • 62 Replies
  • 5676 Views
What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« on: July 31, 2020, 04:27:11 AM »
Linked to this would be what is the difference between evidence and proof.  At what point can we say we have proved something to be correct or incorrect?  To both FE and RE I would ask when would you change 'I know this to be true because I have proof' as against 'I believe this to be true because I have evidence'?

Can you ever present proof which is universally accepted or is the acceptance of proof subject to what you believe or what you want to believe?  The saga about whether the Earth is spinning or not which has been argued about extensively elsewhere is the perfect example.  If you rely solely on what your sense indicate then you would conclude that the Earth is stationary and not moving.  But there are multiple other sources of evidence which tell us the Earth is spinning. So relying entirely on just our sense to tell us what is real and true or not is obviously not the correct line of approach.  We cannot make assumption based purely on what we see and what we feel.  If we take into account different scales of time (some much longer than just a human life time) then our senses start to provide us with clues that the boundaries of what we believe may need to be widened.

As a scientist I would agree that in principle it is risky saying we 'know' anything because when it comes to making the laws of nature and and the laws of physics, we are not the making the rules.  Mother nature does that.  Science is our journey towards being able to understand what the rules are and the consequences of them. We must use all our senses if we are to give ourselves the best chance of being able to understand the laws of nature fully. Even then nothing is guaranteed and so often in science just when we are starting to think we understand something correctly, mother nature puts a spanner in the works and something new is discovered.

That is what makes science fun though isn't it?  Finding out that we are wrong about something we thought we understood is not a sign of weakness but a sign of progress.  And that for me is what makes science fun.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2020, 05:10:52 AM by Solarwind »

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2020, 05:47:03 AM »
As a scientist I would agree that in principle it is risky saying we 'know' anything because when it comes to making the laws of nature and and the laws of physics, we are not the making the rules. 
You are not a scientist. Because the scientist does not act in this way with false assumptions, if acts but corrects it. It shows that the questions you ask like an unbiased observer are not scientists who, after some time, have brought insults to the flat earthers. If that is science, that science is just as unreliable as you are. You could not managed a topic that is open to debate as neutral as in the topic. You even manipulate the subject you started yourself. And so you prove that your so-called science is nothing but manipulation and deception. This is not the exact definition of a proof but a way it is. Hence, we can correct the definion as evidence, but not a proof.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2020, 07:35:14 AM »
Science does not attempt to manipulate deceive anything or anyone.  At least not in my experience it doesn't.  It is only conspiracy theorists who accuse it of such because it might draw different conclusions to those which they believe in.

My question is what is the difference between knowing and believing? Or to put it another way at what point can we say we know rather than we just believe? Can you for example 'prove' that the Earth is flat?  Prove meaning to show verifiable evidence that something is true beyond any reasonable degree of doubt or uncertainty.

I don't see any bias in that.  It is an open question.


*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2020, 02:53:38 PM »
From a philosophical point of view, the difference between believing and knowing can easily be defined as knowledge being justified true belief.
That is there are 2 essential points to have for a belief to become knowledge.
It must be justified.
It must be true.

Other than the underlying reality of it being true or false, we can determine if it is true or false based upon the justification.

The big issues is when the justification is faulty or could be faulty. If you have a justification which you think is valid, but is not, it can lead you to have false beliefs which are not knowledge but which you assume is knowledge. It can also lead you to have true beliefs, which appear justified but in fact are not justified. This leads to the issue of exactly what constitutes justification.

I believe the example commonly given is a clock that is stopped.

If you look up to the clock to see what time it is and see that it says 3:30, and it is in fact 3:30, is this knowledge? You are used to using the clock to determine the time, typically the clock works and tells you the correct time. So it appears justifies, it is true and thus appears to be knowledge.
But if instead of it being 3:30, it is actually 3:45, then it appears the same to you, the only difference is now it isn't true and thus isn't actually knowledge, even though it appears just like knowledge.

This then raises the question on what happens normally when you look up at a clock to see the time, when the clock is working. Do you gain knowledge of the time, or is it still just belief.

This is where you produce a divide between pure philosophy and between common usage.
With pure philosophy we can never know anything, because we have no way to determine if a belief is justified or not or if that justification is faulty (obviously there are some cases where the justification is obviously faulty, but in the cases where it appears justified it may not be).

But with common usage, we can know things which are justified, typically through repeated direct observation or induction (even when people don't know they are doing that).
For example, we know that the sun will "rise" in the east, due to repeated observations of it doing that with no variation.
We know that Earth is round due to the different stars visible in different regions, and the direct observations of it from photos, and many other things.

So in common usage, we know Earth is round, due to the abundance of evidence supporting this fact, while in a pure philosophical sense we don't know anything.

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2020, 03:20:37 PM »
Quote
We know that Earth is round due to the different stars visible in different regions, and the direct observations of it from photos, and many other things.

I happen to agree. So why then do some people around here find it necessary to deny all this and instead maintain that these observations are the product of perspective or 'electromagnetic acceleration' which has the ability to bend light in just the right way to make it seem like the Earth round to us even though (in their belief) it is actually flat?

If flat Earth theory was scientifically based then all evidence would be admissible.  Yet there seems to be some discrimination going on.  In short anything that supports or could be construed to support the belief that the Earth is flat is accepted while anything that potentially counters that belief is denied or dismissed. 

I have tried to find a single form of evidence that can only be true if the Earth is flat. The logical side of my brain says no such evidence exists for the simple reason that the Earth is round as we  both know.  How do we know?  Because as you say there is a mountain of evidence that supports that.  That evidence is available to everyone to assess so why do the vast majority accept this as evidence that the Earth is round while a few continue to insist the Earth is flat?
« Last Edit: August 05, 2020, 02:10:22 AM by Solarwind »

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #5 on: August 05, 2020, 02:10:25 AM »
Consult a dictionary for your answer, solar wind.

"Knowing" is defined as a suggestion one has knowledge or awareness that is secret or known to only a few people.

"Believing" is defined as to accept something is true without proof, or hold something as an opinion.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2020, 02:22:10 AM »
Science does not attempt to manipulate deceive anything or anyone.  At least not in my experience it doesn't.  It is only conspiracy theorists who accuse it of such because it might draw different conclusions to those which they believe in.

My question is what is the difference between knowing and believing? Or to put it another way at what point can we say we know rather than we just believe? Can you for example 'prove' that the Earth is flat?  Prove meaning to show verifiable evidence that something is true beyond any reasonable degree of doubt or uncertainty.

I don't see any bias in that.  It is an open question.
I am already talking about you. You have manipulate your own issue. I told that, if you are a scientist and science is something like this so it is only a deception and manipulation. You are an evidence of it.

You can not be fair when you ask a supposedly fair question. Why did you need so insults to flat earthers? Question is simple, but your explanations are heart breaking. It is just like force others to reply you after they accepted your insults. Why? Why do we such a thing?Instead, why don't you accept you are always starting with wrong assumptations even so continue your baseless arguments, and we can so on after that opening post?
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2020, 01:56:14 PM »
Quote
"Believing" is defined as to accept something is true without proof, or hold something as an opinion.

Which leads be to ask whether the majority of flat Earthers would say they 'know' they Earth is flat and if so what is the proof.  or are they simply flat Earth believers.  In which case, based on your definition, why?

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2020, 09:18:25 PM »
"Knowing" doesn't require objective proof. Under the definition, it only requires one having knowledge or awareness that is secret or known to only a few people.

Flat earthers can therefore correctly say they know the earth to be flat.

The wiki on this site provides knowledge in support of the Earth being flat. Flat earthers may be referring to that knowledge or other secretive knowledge when saying they know the earth is flat.

Knowing and belief are both subjective, perhaps with belief requiring subjective proof, but neither requiring objective proof.

Does that answer your question?

I could say I believe in God and know God is real, and then provide what I deem to be proofs. I guarantee all my proofs will be subjective, as much as I try an argue they are objective.

It's the same thing.


*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #9 on: August 06, 2020, 11:50:57 PM »
...flat Earthers ...
... Earth is flat...
... flat Earth believers....
As everybody we see that, You are playing a game where you fictionalized the result earlier. You need others here just to be wall flowers.

This is a classical globularist behave. You have not give a chance even to your own to be fair.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2020, 12:17:46 AM »
Quote
As everybody we see that,

Of course we do but that doesn't prove the whole Earth is flat does it.  What proportion of the Earths surface can we see directly in relation to its total surface area? 

Quote
You are playing a game where you fictionalized the result earlier. You need others here just to be wall flowers.

I've got absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.. sorry!  If it comes to 'fictionalising' anything you've got the wrong person I'm afraid.  There would be little point in telling stories would there.   But that's just me.

Just so you know my position.  I am not interested in any religiously based beliefs or views or anything else like that.  If you can provide me with genuine scientific evidence that we live on anything other than a globe which is 7926 miles across in equatorial diameter then please explain and I will give that due consideration.  If you can't then we must simply agree to disagree and I will have nothing more to say on the matter.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2020, 12:35:46 AM by Solarwind »

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #11 on: August 07, 2020, 12:32:13 AM »
Of course we do but that doesn't prove the whole Earth is flat does it.
This is already the point I stand on. This is not the thread we debate whether or not the earth is flat. But it is seemingly a background idea in your mind. How can people response all your imagination when the main issue was seemingly different.
What proportion of the Earths surface can we see directly in relation to its total surface area?
Again, this is not the issue according to your topic. Your this question shows us that you want to discuss something else. But people are writing depends on topic. When topic and content are different, events go this way.
I've got absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.. sorry!  If it comes to 'fictionalising' anything you've got the wrong person I'm afraid.  There would be little point in telling stories would there.   But that's just me.
Guess everybody else have a sense have an idea whats going on.

You can discuss any topic about the flat world with us wherever and whenever you want. But don't expect us to read your intention.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

Hamzah

  • 1450
  • The Exposer Of Insecurities
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #12 on: August 07, 2020, 02:38:06 AM »
Knowing is a hard knowledge, mathematics for example. Believing is a soft knowledge, psychology for example.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2020, 02:44:29 AM by Hamzah »
Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path). Al-Baqara (The Cow) - 2:18




*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #13 on: August 07, 2020, 02:47:27 AM »
"Knowing" doesn't require objective proof. Under the definition, it only requires one having knowledge or awareness that is secret or known to only a few people.
Flat earthers can therefore correctly say they know the earth to be flat.
"Knowing" or "know"?
You are using 2 different words and appear to be using a fringe definition of knowing.
And the definition of knowing you are using is an adjective, not a verb.
That means you cannot convert it from the "verb-ing" to "verb".

It's the same thing.
So you are saying it is ficticious and not based upon objective reality and thus isn't actually knowledge?

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #14 on: August 07, 2020, 01:32:52 PM »
No, jack black. Those definitions are copy and paste from the dictionary.

No, jack black. That is not what I'm saying. Subjective is not the same as fictitious. Subjective is based on personal feelings, while fictitious is made up.

No, Hamzah.

Solar wind, I think you're done here.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #15 on: August 07, 2020, 02:28:24 PM »
No, jack black. Those definitions are copy and paste from the dictionary.

No, jack black. That is not what I'm saying. Subjective is not the same as fictitious. Subjective is based on personal feelings, while fictitious is made up.

No, Hamzah.

Solar wind, I think you're done here.

tl;dr: I don't think there is really an answer to be found for Solar's question.

I might be getting hung up on usage here, but I think whatever version of the word 'know' that is in play to get at Solar's question is not the adj definition; The showing or suggesting that one has knowledge or awareness that is secret or known to only a few people. We're not talking about the wink and a nudge, the "knowing smile". I mean the secret, known to a few bit has no relevance.

I think what Solar is talking about is "to know". As in you 'know' something to be true based upon information gained through study, experimentation, observation, evidence, that kind of know. And I think that kind of know is a little tricky.

Because someone could say "I know God exists because of my study of religious texts and the observations and accounts captured therein." And I would say that's still just a subjective belief, you don't really know, because I don't find your evidence or observations rigorous enough to truly be considered evidence supporting a statement of "I know..."

It really comes down to veracity of the evidence and how it reaches or exceeds the bar passing up and through belief and into know.

Solar said something interesting, "If flat Earth theory was scientifically based then all evidence would be admissible." I think that strikes at the core of the issue. Or perhaps muddies it and adds yet another layer. Idk

In my example, I don't feel that scripture is evidence to know God exists. Whereas someone else does. I have ostensibly dismissed what someone feels is evidence to know.

In my world, all space exploration evidence is proof positive for me to know that the earth rotates and is round. Whereas FE completely dismisses all my evidence as inadmissible.  In their eyes, my globe earth is a belief just like in my eyes, someones existence of God is just a belief. The dividing line is what each accepts as the "know" type of evidence. And I'm not sure you can ever reach an agreement on that for a variety of subjects.

Going back to Solar's point maybe one way to tease it out at least for an FE v RE subject is what is the RE evidence that allows RE to know that is dismissed by FE and what is the FE evidence that allows FE to know that is dismissed by RE. As discussed, FE dismisses RE space exploration evidence. What FE evidence does RE dismiss that's as comparably massive as something like space exploration?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #16 on: August 07, 2020, 02:54:48 PM »
No, jack black. Those definitions are copy and paste from the dictionary.
And the definition you copied and pasted was for knowing as an adjective, not a verb.
Hence it has nothing to do with if someone knows something.

No, jack black. That is not what I'm saying. Subjective is not the same as fictitious. Subjective is based on personal feelings, while fictitious is made up.
You appealed to religion, saying it is like that, like how people to know their god exists that is saying it is fictitious, as it is based upon fictional stories rather than reality.
That is not knowledge.

If it is subjective it is belief, not knowledge.

Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #17 on: August 07, 2020, 09:50:31 PM »
Stash and jack, there aren't that many interpretations of the word, knowing. Jack, I like how you try to differentiate the meaning by being either a verb or adjective, and then dont provide the verb meaning.

Solarwind is chasing an easy answer. He just needs to decide for himself what the difference between knowing and believing is. (If there is a difference)

To say you know the earth is round because of NASA photos, geography, and the scientific explanation, simply means you accept those to be true.

Let's say I was religious or spiritual, and decided to conduct a few experiments with God. Let's say I decide to pray to be the owner of a specific object which may be very rare and my physical efforts to obtain said item are exhausted. I give a time limit to receive the item. I pray in a way I have already received the item at the time I have set. Let's say, the event unfolds exactly as I visualize, and I receive the item at my predetermined time.

Let's say I repeat the experiment a number of times, and am successful each time.

That's an experiment. For me, that might be enough proof God answered my prayer, and therefore God is real. You could say you know god is real, and it not be a fictitious statement at all.

But it's not objective proof. Its subjective proof. Also, an outsider could easily argue the results to be pure coincidences.

So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #18 on: August 07, 2020, 10:31:18 PM »
Stash and jack, there aren't that many interpretations of the word, knowing. Jack, I like how you try to differentiate the meaning by being either a verb or adjective, and then dont provide the verb meaning.

I still think you're starting from the wrong place. And again, this has turned into a saga about word usage which seems unnecessary, but is also now important.

Forget the word (adj) "knowing". As you stated, it means: showing or suggesting that one has knowledge or awareness that is secret or known to only a few people. That word and definition has nothing to do with this. Secret? Known to only a few people? Irrelevant.

What you want is the verb, to know:

verb (used without object), knew, known, know·ing.

to have knowledge or clear and certain perception, as of fact or truth. to be cognizant or aware, as of some fact, circumstance, or occurrence; have information, as about something.


Ditch your adjective 'knowing'.

Solarwind is chasing an easy answer. He just needs to decide for himself what the difference between knowing and believing is. (If there is a difference)

To say you know the earth is round because of NASA photos, geography, and the scientific explanation, simply means you accept those to be true.

Let's say I was religious or spiritual, and decided to conduct a few experiments with God. Let's say I decide to pray to be the owner of a specific object which may be very rare and my physical efforts to obtain said item are exhausted. I give a time limit to receive the item. I pray in a way I have already received the item at the time I have set. Let's say, the event unfolds exactly as I visualize, and I receive the item at my predetermined time.

Let's say I repeat the experiment a number of times, and am successful each time.

That's an experiment. For me, that might be enough proof God answered my prayer, and therefore God is real. You could say you know god is real, and it not be a fictitious statement at all.

But it's not objective proof. Its subjective proof. Also, an outsider could easily argue the results to be pure coincidences.

So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

All that said, I'm having a hard time rejecting your "knowing is as subjective as believing." And it's bugging me because I want to reject it but I can't. Maybe that's what JB was referring to when he was talking about if you look at 'knowing' from a purely philosophical perspective. But I'm fixing to find something that meets both philosophy and reality.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #19 on: August 07, 2020, 10:44:05 PM »
Stash and jack, there aren't that many interpretations of the word, knowing. Jack, I like how you try to differentiate the meaning by being either a verb or adjective, and then dont provide the verb meaning.

Solarwind is chasing an easy answer. He just needs to decide for himself what the difference between knowing and believing is. (If there is a difference)

To say you know the earth is round because of NASA photos, geography, and the scientific explanation, simply means you accept those to be true.

Let's say I was religious or spiritual, and decided to conduct a few experiments with God. Let's say I decide to pray to be the owner of a specific object which may be very rare and my physical efforts to obtain said item are exhausted. I give a time limit to receive the item. I pray in a way I have already received the item at the time I have set. Let's say, the event unfolds exactly as I visualize, and I receive the item at my predetermined time.

Let's say I repeat the experiment a number of times, and am successful each time.

That's an experiment. For me, that might be enough proof God answered my prayer, and therefore God is real. You could say you know god is real, and it not be a fictitious statement at all.

But it's not objective proof. Its subjective proof. Also, an outsider could easily argue the results to be pure coincidences.

So, knowing is as subjective as believing.
This. All sane people should accept this explanation is enough.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #20 on: August 08, 2020, 05:56:54 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2020, 06:01:30 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2020, 06:40:08 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.


Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #23 on: August 08, 2020, 06:47:21 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2020, 07:55:10 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.

Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #25 on: August 08, 2020, 08:33:37 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #26 on: August 08, 2020, 10:02:12 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.
Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #27 on: August 08, 2020, 10:54:53 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.
Again, the claim is that the head will be involved the other one without any part of them dead. This is possible theorically. Hence, you are wrong when you accept it dead. because it is not dead.

Try again, another example.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #28 on: August 08, 2020, 10:59:22 AM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.
Again, the claim is that the head will be involved the other one without any part of them dead. This is possible theorically. Hence, you are wrong when you accept it dead. because it is not dead.

Try again, another example.

Nothing theoretical about it.

Since you are claiming that the body can live without the head, prove it.
Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25431
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is the difference between knowing and believing?
« Reply #29 on: August 08, 2020, 01:25:08 PM »
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.
Again, the claim is that the head will be involved the other one without any part of them dead. This is possible theorically. Hence, you are wrong when you accept it dead. because it is not dead.

Try again, another example.

Nothing theoretical about it.

Since you are claiming that the body can live without the head, prove it.
I told a body can wait enough time without the head, it can stand a while until a head united. I would like to remind that in people with brain death, the body continues to work depending on the machine. We are not professionals of head transplant, but he is.

If you do not trust surgeons so who can you trust to?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/head-transplant-sergio-canavero-has-it-been-done-corpses-cadaver-human-a8060176.html

Again, it was not an exact example. You can not call a head -if it is ready to transplant a living body- a dead. It may be alive. Stop the stubborn behave. You are only proving you can not accept losing the case, just likemany globularist here, because you have either programmed or ordered for that. Because all sane people can see that after my head-transplant explanation case closed actually.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1