Why facts are stupid

[xerx]

The only facts that you can trust are the ones that you've falsified yourself.

[CosmicCat]

"The moment you step into the world of facts, you step into a world of limits." - G. K. Chesterton

[Nephilthoth]

The only facts that you can trust are the ones that you've falsified yourself.

How would someone go about falsifying these facts?

[godslave]

-" You know, your parents had to have sex in order for you to exist right ?
- Objection your honor "hearsay" !! "

[Aster]

“History is Written by Victors.”

[myresearch]

Facts are stupid when it is not really tied to what is being talked about or what is asked when it diverts from the main subject.

Facts can also used in order to manipulate. If there was one crime in a city this year and if there was two crime in a city next year. They can say crime increased %100 percent which is true but due to the presentation, it overshadows the truth rather than pointing towards it.

[ouronis]

this is why te/fi is inferior

[The Reality Denialist]

“History is Written by Victors.”

and that's a fact.

[The Joker The Fool]

"History is written by Viktor Gulenko"

[Metamorph]

Extremely niche pseudohistories are written by Viktor Gulenko, in his time between authoring torture manuals and judging people solely based on their appearances.

[adage]

Yeah, facts can be twisted or just plain made up to serve agendas.

Tho, I found life got better when I started thinking of feelings as facts about people.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

If facts were stupid, science would make no progress.

A person might use lies disguised as truth, or genuinely believe something false is true, but we can assess the truthfulness of their claims.

[Renna]

If we don’t trust any other’s experience then human civilization would never evolves beyond caveman level…

[leckysupport]

Principles (or understanding of the subject matter) with corrections based on observation and study.

Usually people forget first principles of a subject matter in get lost in nonsense, a nonsense that usually involves the misuse of facts.

[leckysupport]

If facts were stupid, science would make no progress.

Epistemologically speaking science is an extreme edge case.

The scientific method does not translate to any other domain of knowledge.

[Exodus]

This is why science requires faith too. Just look at the reproducibility crisis - trust the wrong people and it all falls apart.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

Facts are stupid and that's a fact.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

This is why science requires faith too. Just look at the reproducibility crisis - trust the wrong people and it all falls apart.

You're more likely to trust the wrong people if you base your decisions on faith and not evidence.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Epistemologically speaking science is an extreme edge case.

The scientific method does not translate to any other domain of knowledge.

I don't think that's right. The "scientific method" is the best way of establishing truth to a level of confidence.

[Metaphor]

I guess if I said no, this would turn into a paradox of facts.

[Robin Gosens]

The utility of facts is that they are building pieces for importing categories and restrictions, stasis points for shaping the context warping wizard.

[leckysupport]

I don't think that's right. The "scientific method" is the best way of establishing truth to a level of confidence.

When you start thinking of "domains of knowledge", like pragmatic knowledge specifically related to writing novels or running a business. The "scientific method" becomes inappropriate as a model of knowing the best thing to do or even what the best thing is.

Science requires unrealistic limitations on reality to prove a truth, it simplifies and isolates. Other domains can't do this.

Outside of science a fact can be both true and false depending on context. Only principles and understanding of the subject matter can really decern the appropriateness of a fact to a given context.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Facts are stupid when a person who values Te but is mediocre-with it tries to put you on some type of chess board or bulletin board that doesn't apply to your own unique situation, but it's technically mostly true because that's what experts said. Otherwise they can be useful.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

When you start thinking of "domains of knowledge", like pragmatic knowledge specifically related to writing novels or running a business. The "scientific method" becomes inappropriate as a model of knowing the best thing to do or even what the best thing is.

Science requires unrealistic limitations on reality to prove a truth, it simplifies and isolates. Other domains can't do this.

Outside of science a fact can be both true and false depending on context. Only principles and understanding of the subject matter can really decern the appropriateness of a fact to a given context.

I don't think there's an area of knowledge that's outside science, it's just that people feel the need to act in areas where isn't there a clear answer. Risk, essentially.

[Metamorph]

Feelings don't care about your facts.

[K0m0d0]

Facts don't speak for themselves. At least, not always.
Which of the facts do we emphasize? Which do we ignore? How does that affect the conclusions we make?
Those are the real questions.

[Metamorph]

Facts don't speak for themselves. At least, not always.
Which of the facts do we emphasize? Which do we ignore? How does that affect the conclusions we make?
Those are the real questions.

You really can prove anything with facts. With facts I can prove Mr. Hilter is a peaceful dog-loving, theatre-going, vegetarian artist hippie. That's why we really do need metanarratives.

[leckysupport]

I don't think there's an area of knowledge that's outside science, it's just that people feel the need to act in areas where isn't there a clear answer. Risk, essentially.

I'm a big fan of clarity, but we have to act (in the vast majority of areas in life) in areas without a clear answer.

The "real world" (TM) throws a lot of noise at us where facts very become unstable. The realm of science (with the scientific method) purposely and successfully removes this noise because of the limitations they are allowed to impose due to the subject matter (but I suspect that this won't be true for long).

Anyway in conclusion: facts are important and work well on their own in certain and limited contexts.

[Fake Intellectual]

"The moment you step into the world of facts, you step into a world of limits." - G. K. Chesterton

Maybe because the world has limits. I don't know why people have such an issue with this.

[Clarke]

The only facts that you can trust are the ones that you've falsified yourself.

Quite frankly, my Te is offended.