Originally posted by selfreasoning4all
View Post
So what we have is some set of observations, always to some degree incomplete and ambiguous. Then we have people collecting sets of observations and drawing tentative conclusions about their causes and relationships. Not everyone selects the same set of observations for many reasons. For example, some observations available to some may not be available to others. For example, WHICH facts are relevant and should be included depends on the tentative explanation of their relationshps and causes. For example, observations may have been taken differently - at different times, different places, using different instruments, etc. etc. Getting any two observations to "match up" so that everyone agrees these are observations of the same thing is quite difficult.
So your attempt to use Pure Reason to derive your foregone conclusion founders on the uncertainty, ambiguity, and limitations of your premises. When the Real World must be distorted beyond all recognition in order to force foregone conclusions, it makes me nervous.
Comment