What I realized

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.29.2021 08:51PM

3

5

01.29.2021 08:51PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Fair enough but what I take from that is

the definition includes but it’s not limited to humans, perhaps I should’ve responded different to

There is no dictionary that supports your assertion that FACTS "existed" before humans.

There is no dictionary that supports your assertion that FACTS didn’t exist before humans there’s many subsets to the definition of fact you can’t just pick one and say no facts existed because of that one definition because it ignores the others that say nothing of the sort. Let me ask you a question the person or thing that created the human mind if it’s existence isn’t factual then what is it because you don’t seem to know the answer in regards to the creator so how can you make claims on something you know nothing about?

#302

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 09:16PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 09:16PM

-->

@Tarik

Let me ask you a question the person or thing that created the human mind if it’s existence isn’t factual then what is it because you don’t seem to know the answer in regards to the creator so how can you make claims on something you know nothing about?

The hypothetical "person or thing that created the human mind" is unknowable.

NOUMENON is a FACT because it is logically-necessary (undeniable).

NOUMENON is defined by HUMAN IGNORANCE (EPISTEMOLOGICAL LIMITS).

how can you make claims on something you know nothing about?

How can anyone make claims that are neither empirically demonstrable nor logically-necessary?

Topic's author

#303

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.29.2021 09:55PM

3

5

01.29.2021 09:55PM

-->

@3RU7AL

The hypothetical "person or thing that created the human mind" is unknowable.

And how do you know this?

NOUMENON is a FACT because it is logically-necessary (undeniable).

NOUMENON is defined by HUMAN IGNORANCE (EPISTEMOLOGICAL LIMITS).
Since when was ignorance logically necessary?That’s a huge contradiction.

How can anyone make claims that are neither empirically demonstrable nor logically-necessary?

That’s what an opinion is.

#304

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:19PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:19PM

-->

@Tarik

The hypothetical "person or thing that created the human mind" is unknowable.
And how do you know this?

The hypothetical "person or thing that created the human mind" is unknown and may be unknowable.

Topic's author

#305

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.29.2021 10:20PM

3

5

01.29.2021 10:20PM

-->

@3RU7AL

How do you know this?

#306

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:21PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:21PM

-->

@Tarik

NOUMENON is a FACT because it is logically-necessary (undeniable).

NOUMENON is defined by HUMAN IGNORANCE (EPISTEMOLOGICAL LIMITS).
Since when was ignorance logically necessary?That’s a huge contradiction.

The human mind is defined as much by what it does NOT know as it is defined by what it DOES know.

To be human is to possess human limitations.

Topic's author

#307

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.29.2021 10:26PM

3

5

01.29.2021 10:26PM

-->

@3RU7AL

The human mind is defined as much by what it does NOT know as it is defined by what it DOES know.

But you weren’t defining the human mind you were defining noumenon (whatever that is).

#308

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:28PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:28PM

-->

@Tarik

The hypothetical "person or thing that created the human mind" is unknown and may be unknowable.
How do you know this?

I know that I DO NOT KNOW THE HYPOTHETICAL "person or thing that created the human mind".

And I also know that the very concept of a "person or thing that created the human mind" is logically incoherent.

Our best guess, based on (known) FACTS is that some process "created" (or "produced") what we call "the human mind", NOT a "person or thing".

#309

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:30PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:30PM

-->

@Tarik

How can anyone make claims that are neither empirically demonstrable nor logically-necessary?
That’s what an opinion is.

FINALLY, WE AGREE ON SOMETHING.

#310

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:32PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:32PM

-->

@Tarik

The human mind is defined as much by what it does NOT know as it is defined by what it DOES know.
But you weren’t defining the human mind you were defining noumenon (whatever that is).

The NOUMENON is verifiable by the human mind, by a reliable process of logical deduction.

Topic's author

#311

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.29.2021 10:34PM

3

5

01.29.2021 10:34PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Our best guess, based on (known) FACTS is that some process "created" (or "produced") what we call "the human mind", NOT a "person or thing".

What’s the known facts that made you presume it’s a process? Also isn’t a process a thing? For example intercourse is a process but it’s also a thing life forms engage in.

#312

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsIibD-TLcM

01.29.2021 10:54PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:54PM

-->

@Tarik

Our best guess, based on (known) FACTS is that some process "created" (or "produced") what we call "the human mind", NOT a "person or thing".
What’s the known facts that made you presume it’s a process?

#313

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:55PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:55PM

-->

@Tarik

Also isn’t a process a thing? For example intercourse is a process but it’s also a thing life forms engage in.

When you stated, "person or thing" were you intending to imply "person or process"?

#314

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLKyLwHGxRg

01.29.2021 10:59PM

3

4

9

01.29.2021 10:59PM

-->

@Tarik

Topic's author

#315

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.30.2021 12:37AM

3

5

01.30.2021 12:37AM

-->

@3RU7AL

Foxes and humans are related? I didn’t get the memo, but even if I accepted the comparison the narrative is the first human mind, the only way this comparison is somewhat fitting is if it deals with the first fox. Not to mention that it was the human species that was responsible for the breeding of the foxes if your example is fitting then another species is responsible for the first human mind, hence why I said something or someone.

#316

ethang5

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

ethang5

01.30.2021 04:35AM

3

6

01.30.2021 04:35AM

Is the following statement "fact" or "opinion"?

"Your DebateArt.com user-icon is 2 centimeters square on my computer screen."

(IFF) you can't verify a claim (THEN) that claim CANNOT be considered a FACT.

Have fun while you wallow in what "we consider", when you wish to talk about "what is", let me know.

#317

Debates: 22

Posts: 11,287

3

6

01.30.2021 07:04AM

3

6

01.30.2021 07:04AM

-->

@Tarik

1. That's a truism.......Though it's possible to possess the relevant data.....Not dead men for sure.....That was my point.

2. That which one possess...... From which we can deduce a fact or a conclusion....A wholly internal process.

Topic's author

#318

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.30.2021 07:37AM

3

5

01.30.2021 07:37AM

-->

@zedvictor4

Not dead men for sure

What? You’re not sure there’s dead men? If you have a point you’re not making it very clear.

That which one possess

The same guy that called me out for not explaining myself refuses to name the “one”, a comatose person cannot deduce facts that’s just a fact in itself, and the human brain isn’t a device (devices are along the lines of technology, the dictionary is free). I think you’ve dug yourself in enough of an ignorant hole and I’m gonna stop the bleeding by just telling you where your blatantly wrong, too bad I’m the only one that can give truisms here.

#319

Debates: 22

Posts: 11,287

3

6

01.30.2021 07:51AM

3

6

01.30.2021 07:51AM

-->

@Tarik

Deliberately misinterpreting figures of speech is poor argument......Your clutching at straws now Tarik.

And where did the comatose person suddenly appear from?

Though in terms of function, "comatose" is a generalisation anyway.

Topic's author

#320

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.30.2021 08:05AM

3

5

01.30.2021 08:05AM

-->

@zedvictor4

Deliberately misinterpreting figures of speech is poor argument......Your clutching at straws now Tarik.

I didn’t misinterpret (wasn’t given the opportunity hence my confusion). I simply asked you to make yourself more clear and repeatedly gave you your chance to give your clear interpretation and you couldn’t answer the call.

And where did the comatose person suddenly appear from?

After you made that argument about fact deduction, I used that as an example proving you wrong.

Though in terms of function, "comatose" is a generalisation anyway.

Even if it was I don’t see the point of bringing that up.

#321

Debates: 22

Posts: 11,287

3

6

01.30.2021 08:34AM

3

6

01.30.2021 08:34AM

-->

@Tarik

You never mentioned a comatose person....Just an MND sufferer.

And I bring up points that clearly refute your argument.

MND sufferers usually die because of respiratory failure....Whether or not that is preceded by a comatose state, would depend upon other factors. Such as palliative care or life support or how the disease progresses within the individual.

Nonetheless internal management in terms of brain and other systems, will continue to function ( within the limits afforded by their malfunction) until death.

Though none of this alters how humans process observations and data, and the consequent internal creation of facts and opinions.

Topic's author

#322

Debates: 1

Posts: 2,397

3

5

01.30.2021 08:52AM

3

5

01.30.2021 08:52AM

-->

@zedvictor4

You never mentioned a comatose person....Just an MND sufferer.

Correction I mentioned both, the latter first and the former second.

And I bring up points that clearly refute your argument.

If that’s what you believe then so be it.

Though none of this alters how humans process observations and data, and the consequent internal creation of facts and opinions.

Not all humans can that’s my point (my comatose example proves this). Like I said before facts is beyond us it isn’t something we created. Before humans existed there were no humans, that statement being a fact proves that.

#323

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,463

3

4

9