Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
So "factology" itself becomes the myth. Or you have to redefine what you consider "real" in order to base "facts" from.
A theory is not a fact.
Conclusions are not facts.
Causal relations are not facts.
How valid or workable all of these are does not matter. A fact is an atomic piece of measurable information, and implies that it cannot be different than the fact. For example, the mass or temperature of something.
No matter how valid a theory is, it does not exclude other theories about the same from also being true, and therefore it is not a fact and should not be regarded as such.
Science is about practice and experimentation.
That isn't very realistic.