Whoa...

[SaberSentinel]

Sorry to crush your belive, but as the proffersor says: there is only theories, no facts.

Is that statment a fact?

[Nightwing]

Sorry to crush your belive, but as the proffersor says: there is only theories, no facts.

Is that statment a fact?

Ha ha.

We're not talking about absolutism or relative truths. It has to do with the fact that absolute knowledge is unattainable, therefore one cannot use science (human knowledge and understanding) to gain it.

However, unless there was some sort of "supernatural" occurrence (that's religion for religious types, and fifth-dimensional spacetime or above, as well as multi-universe theory for scientific types), since those would supercede normal physics and whatnot, what TimeRender's saying is true.

While you could tell me that 2+2=3 and I couldn't say that I have absolute knowledge to prove you wrong, you'd still come off pretty stupid.

[987654321a]

Ha!
That film is/was a swedish commercial!

haha thanks for telling us, now we all know its fake!

[SaberSentinel]

We're not talking about absolutism or relative truths. It has to do with the fact that absolute knowledge is unattainable, therefore one cannot use science (human knowledge and understanding) to gain it.

You said "absolute knowledge is unattainable" Do you know that?
if someone were to say "I can know nothing for sure" then they are saying that they know something, namely that they know nothing, and thus are condradicting themselves.

I think you can know something for certain. It's the old "I think therefore I am" argument. You can deny everthing around you exists, but you can't deny that you exist. If you do deny your existence, you have to wonder, who/what is doing the denying?

And yes BTW I do agree with TimeRender (a curiously appropriate username considering the topic).

[Ryma Mara]

I think anything and everything is possable.

[Nightwing]

You said "absolute knowledge is unattainable" Do you know that?

What I mean is that in order to truly know something, you'd have to have ultimate knowledge about the universe, which is unattainable to a human brain. Yes, I know that I just said "It's absolutely true that we cannot know absolute truth". It's an odd paradox. *shrug*

[SaberSentinel]

What I mean is that in order to truly know something, you'd have to have ultimate knowledge about the universe,

I don't think you have to know everything to know something. for instance: I know there is a online store that has a wonderful forum, is filled with a great bunch of guys, and has an incredible owner named Tim. I also haven't the first clue what gave Tim the idea to start this place (though I'm glad he did ). Does that mean I can know something without having to know everything?

I'm passionate about philosophy and I love debate. The old "If you wrestle with a a pig you'll just get dirty, and the pig likes it" certainly applies to me in this area. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion, so when I stick my foot in my mouth, let me know and I'll stop.

[TimeRender]

And yes BTW I do agree with TimeRender (a curiously appropriate username considering the topic).

Ah, thanks for noticing. Time travel has always fascinated me, and I've spent a lot of time reading about it. My screen name is actually a term used in engineering, but I always liked the sound of the word and imagined it being the name of some sort of time traveling hero. Maybe that's why I got so fired up about this subject, even though I was trying to debunk it.

[SilentBob501]

thanks Enolmano, thats exactly what i wanted to know.

[Enolmano]

Sorry