Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (84697)	8/3/2000 1:24:50 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Actually, that is not quite true. Many things are accepted as facts that depend upon one or few witnesses to attest to them, and cannot be otherwise demonstrated. The classic example, of course, is history, where testamentary evidence is accepted all the time. Even in the natural sciences, there has been accumulation of data that has not been immediately verifiable, as when Darwin's account of his Galapagos observations were accepted. It is perfectly possible for something to be a fact, but unprovable if challenged........

To: cosmicforce who wrote (84697)	8/3/2000 1:40:08 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

By the way, a compelling inference may be referred to as a fact. If all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man, then it is a fact that Socrates is mortal. If the level of confidence in the Big Bang grows, it will cease to be "theory", and will become a "fact". Now, if that is so, it is fact that can be known to only a few, who have the requisite knowledge to understand why it is compelling. For the rest of us, it will be accepted as a fact upon their testimony.