Uhm yea...whatever.....
I've learned that as soon as someone starts hair splitting, correcting spelling and grammar....or exploiting an instance of misusage then they aren't really concerned/capable with meeting the true topic of discusion headon.....sorry....
Seriously...if this is they way that you approach a debate or discussion then it's completely bizarre that you could have possibly jumped on the religion wagon.....did your mind just break or what?...during al of those long hours of contemplation on whether something was translated correctly from Greek or whatever?...hahahahah - man you've had it rough no doubt.

Do you agree that you and your chosen opponent will not even be arguing about the same thing if you use the same terms to mean different things? Defintion of terms is a necessary propaedeutic to logical argument.

Justin

This is the closest I can come to my philosophy regarding reality.
Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
— Ayn Rand, "Introducing Objectivism" The Objectivist Newsletter Vol. 1 No. 8 August, 1962 p. 35
Objectivism holds that there is one reality, the one in which we live. It is self-evident that reality exists and is what it is: our job is to discover it. Objectivism stands against all forms of metaphysical relativism or idealism. It holds it as undeniable that humans have free will, and opposes metaphysical determinism or fatalism. More generally, it holds that there is no fundamental contradiction between the free, abstract character of mental life and the physical body in which it resides. And so it denies the existence of any "supernatural" or ineffable dimension for spirits or souls.

How on earth is 'using language correctly' hair splitting?

This is certainly true. Reality is an objective absolute - I'm glad you've at least come that far for there are a lot of people who haven't.

Now knowing that the reality exists, we can attempt to find out about it - learn pieces of it, etc. That is one thing that science can help provide us - insight into this reality. Theology acts in the same way - it provides us with insight into this reality.

So now, what again are you trying to say ' I imagine it is still something along the lines of 'if I can't demonstrably see it, it isn't a part of reality'...

oh boy...another ayn rand proponent/devotee... how sad

That would be correct in a very specific and nuanced argument...but would not necessarily be correct in this discussion....If someone explained to me that a friend had died in a car crash...and that the force was so traumatic that the steering wheel broke.....but I later found out that the vehicle wasn't a car but a truck....or a deer...or a telephone poll whatever...I can still get the gist of the message. It was a very violent collision resulting in a persons death......To me the gist of the discussion was WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS SUCH A THING AS SCIENTIC TRUTH FACT OR REALITY....otherwise why would I be challenged to list?....so even if I did list something that could be debated...the principle topic is still intact....

It seems that the question is whether fact, truth, and reality may safely be used interchangeably or whether they ought to be defined to avoid ambiguity. I think that is what Cadet was trying to get at. If it is uncertain "truth" and "fact" mean the same thing, do you think this might be confusing to onlookers?

Justin

I haven't corrected your spelling or grammar at all, though it could use some work. I have simply pointed out to you that words have meanings, and you must use them within their meanings. Why should I care about anything that you write if you don't care enough about it to use words properly?



Tell me, does the rattling when you shake your head bother those nearby much?

We aren't talking about such normal conversations though. We are talking about higher things where the meaning of words is critical.

Cadet.....do you or do you not recognize scientific truth, fact or reality?....just come clean brother.....quit with the word games.

I should think it fairly obvious by now. Perhaps you should reread my posts?

First, it must be determined if we are referring to the same concept when using the words, "fact", "truth", and "reality".

We've been here for years. There's no hurry.

Justin

According to my english language dictionary.....I'm pretty sure the words can be used interchangeably.....I believe that if you look up the words truth, fact, and reality....they cross reference eachother as part of the very definition of each?

No..you are written off.....you're not interested in this discussion......and still playing games. Caio.

Ciao.

Not my fault that you can't handly criticism.

We've ceased to be productive, here. Time for a break.