jackalo:

A theory isn't used to descirbe an outcome, it's an explanation of why.

From Encyclopedia Britannica " A scientific theory is a structure suggested by scientific laws and is devised to explain them in a scientifically rational manner."

 

From dictionary.com"Hypothesis

noun

a mere assumption or guess."

 

A scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing can become multiple things depending on what the hypothesis is. A scientific theory is NOT something not proven, buy a dictionary or look up a dictionary online.

 

When you say you can never prove anything 100% your getting into philosophy not science. In science many things are proven 100%.

Okay try and prove one thing to me.... Try it, then I'll counter it.

 You will fail I can tell you that.

 There are things we accept to be true to the world we live in and see., but that does not mean this is a true reality. 

 You can say "the sky is blue" and I can then say "No you perceive the sky as blue, there is no real way to know its true color" 

you can say "humans need water to survive" I can the say " How do you know that its truly water we are drinking? what if the water is an illusion that is being put into your head by a deceiver when in the true reality you need to drink acid to survive" 

 

my responses would be a possible out come, even tough they are not likely the show there are other options to those conclusions  meaning that the conclusion give (though to many people accepted as 100% true) have some doubt to them so there fore cannot be 100% true. you can have a conclusion that is 99.999999999999% true, but thats not 100%.

 

and my use of a theory is still 100% correct,

 

Theory:

a logical, systematic set of principles or explanation that has undergone testing or validation from careful observations and has stood up against attempts to prove it false. A scientific theory can be used to make a variety of predictions of what will happen under different circumstances.

 Again an explanation cannot be proven 100% true, it can only be valid or invalid. Thats what logic is, here is an example of logic.

You can also look at it this way, you say there is nothing faster than light, but where ever light goes darkness is there first. 

If all purple things are blue

 and all Red things are purple

All red things must be blue

 

Also follows the logical statement of

All P are B

All R are P

Therefore All R are B 

 

 

fiery grave:

jackalo:

A theory isn't used to descirbe an outcome, it's an explanation of why.

From Encyclopedia Britannica " A scientific theory is a structure suggested by scientific laws and is devised to explain them in a scientifically rational manner."

 

From dictionary.com"Hypothesis

noun

a mere assumption or guess."

 

A scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing can become multiple things depending on what the hypothesis is. A scientific theory is NOT something not proven, buy a dictionary or look up a dictionary online.

 

When you say you can never prove anything 100% your getting into philosophy not science. In science many things are proven 100%.

Okay try and prove one thing to me.... Try it, then I'll counter it.

 You will fail I can tell you that.

 There are things we accept to be true to the world we live in and see., but that does not mean this is a true reality. 

 You can say "the sky is blue" and I can then say "No you perceive the sky as blue, there is no real way to know its true color" 

you can say "humans need water to survive" I can the say " How do you know that its truly water we are drinking? what if the water is an illusion that is being put into your head by a deceiver when in the true reality you need to drink acid to survive" 

 

my responses would be a possible out come, even tough they are not likely the show there are other options to those conclusions  meaning that the conclusion give (though to many people accepted as 100% true) have some doubt to them so there fore cannot be 100% true. you can have a conclusion that is 99.999999999999% true, but thats not 100%.

 

and my use of a theory is still 100% correct,

 

Theory:

a logical, systematic set of principles or explanation that has undergone testing or validation from careful observations and has stood up against attempts to prove it false. A scientific theory can be used to make a variety of predictions of what will happen under different circumstances.

 Again an explanation cannot be proven 100% true, it can only be valid or invalid. Thats what logic is, here is an example of logic.

You can also look at it this way, you say there is nothing faster than light, but where ever light goes darkness is there first. 

If all purple things are blue

 and all Red things are purple

All red things must be blue

 

Also follows the logical statement of

All P are B

All R are P

Therefore All R are B 

 

Umm..you're getting into way too much philosophy here, not science.

Your statement...

fiery grave:

You can say "the sky is blue" and I can then say "No you perceive the sky as blue, there is no real way to know its true color"

...isn't a legitimate argument. It like someone saying "my cat is well behaved" and then you say "nope, its a dog". That's not doubt in theory. No one can verify that what we each see as "blue" is the same to someone else, but we can establish what the standard for blue is. Thus, each person looking at the sky can verify that the color matches the standard for blue, and thus is blue by definition.

A better example would be the Theory of Gravity. We have tons of equations to relate gravity to all sorts of applications, but when it comes down to it, we don't actually know what causes gravity. Scientists are still looking for theoretical particles called "gravitons" that may be the source, but for all we know, the Theory of Gravity could just be a quirk in our little corner of the universe.

I think that's the difference you're looking for here. The first example is fact, not theory. (Fact defined as per the human race. Extraterrestrial life may use the same exact same language as humanity (small chance of that) but instead call the color blue "red"). The second example is actual theory and how its being supported, but at the same time how its not definitive.

 

Philosophy is science, Science started as philosophy, Science has to follow the rules of philosophy, An invalid point can not be true. (do realize valid is different than true) The two fields are closely related and often overlap.

Philosophy is needed to come up with those explanations, without it they would make about as much sense as 2 + trees = dogs. 

my example was showing valid logic, not sound or true logic, thats why scientist (a majority of them, especially the people in the hard sciences) are philosophers as well.

 

Also i want to point out that the sky isn't blue, its every color but blue, thats why it reflects blue light.

as well as that Philosophy literally means means the love of wisdom/knowledge, and the combined meaning is the pursuit of wisdom/knowledge while science means knowledge.

Everything science "proves" is only relative to the world we know, we don't know that this world is even real and have no way to  prove it is real.... it seems real but we don't necessarily know it is for certain.

 

Jason my argument is valid and legitimate and you example is no where even close to mine, My argument is simply stating that you can't be certain it is the color we call blue, you can't be certain its any color or if it even exist, we see it and it exist in our reality, but the basis is you can't be certain that our reality is true reality. Your example would work better if you said "you can't be certain the cat exist, and that its not an illusion".

 

Lets use this say a man is on a mind altering drug and starts seeing a flying purple pig.... to this man it is very real he can see it smell it taste it and hear it... you come along and he is explaining this to you... you don't see it at all and realize that what he is seeing is not real at all. now how do you know we are not in some sort of similar state? you don't.... and you can't 

 

jackalo:You honestly don't see the difference between philosophy and science?

Dictionary.com ftw.

---

Forge FTW.
3 accounts in the top 50 1v1 standard.
Good 1v1 standard non-asian Forge player
45 TS For 1v1

URL of the week:
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/time-zone/usa/pacific-time/

what so difrenet between it?

They are both searching for truth and knowledge, with out philosophy science wouldn't exist, they both use observations to come up with a conclusion of the world, they both use logic to determine what is true  and what is not, philosophy uses logic to come up with a theory while science uses logic to do the same.

the only difference is that scientist test it, but they can still be wrong, look at the triceratops thing recently. 

 

Oxford dictionary define science as: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment: 

Philosophy: the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.2 the study of the theoretical basis of a particular branch of knowledge or experience: 

See where these things overlap a lot.

 

I used the oxford dictionary as it is considered to be the standard in US, Canadian, and European countries for courts of law and any other applicable locations