Can you give an example of a piece of knowledge that does not rely on assumptions? Watch

LegallyJasmine
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Bet you can't
0
reply
Picnic1
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
Without bringing the tired old Descartian doubt in to it, please, anyone who replies.

I know that I feel like I'm typing this.
Last edited by Picnic1; 1 month ago
0
reply
gjd800
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
So what?
0
reply
Picnic1
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by gjd800)
So what?
What are you talking about? A question is not knowledge. It might sometimes feature or imply some related piece of knowledge but the question itself is not knowledge.
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by JasmineMonsoon)
Bet you can't
That if I drop my cup of tea it will fall downwards rather than upwards?
4
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by harrysbar)
That if I drop my cup of tea it will fall downwards rather than upwards?
Only on earth. Making assumptions of gravity, and just because it has done it before doesn't mean it would again.

What if you dropped it onto a trampoline at the same height? What if you dropped it onto a desk at same height? What if you dropped it by waving your arm in the air and it flies upwards
3
reply
TheRevivedMedic
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by JasmineMonsoon)
Bet you can't
Donald trump is the president. What's the assumption in that? I can't think of any
0
reply
LegallyJasmine
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by harrysbar)
That if I drop my cup of tea it will fall downwards rather than upwards?
Basing that on an assumption in science that what has happened before will happen again. 😅That natural occurrences will continue to happen as they have forever. Also, I should have specified not observations conclusions. The conclusion as the other user said is the explanation of gravity, and the way gravity works as we have described it (the warping of space and time) is an assumption that only satisfies the evidence we have now
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
Last edited by LegallyJasmine; 1 month ago
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by tashkent46)
Only on earth. Making assumptions of gravity, and just because it has done it before doesn't mean it would again.

What if you dropped it onto a trampoline at the same height? What if you dropped it onto a desk at same height? What if you dropped it by waving your arm in the air and it flies upwards
That whatever I say, some smartarse will contradict it?
That when I die, if my body is buried in the ground, it will rot?
1
reply
Xhail
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by JasmineMonsoon)
Bet you can't
1 + 1 = 2 ?
0
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by harrysbar)
That whatever I say, some smartarse will contradict it?
That when I die, if my body is buried in the ground, it will rot?
What if the person who responds isn't a smartarse? What if they don't respond at all? What if your body having been buried in the ground doesn't rot due to some persevering soil, biology or maybe some kind of body anti rotting feature like the Egyptians and lots of people do.

That your body will rot rests on fundamental assumptions of soil and biology.
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by tashkent46)
What if the person who responds isn't a smartarse? What if they don't respond at all? What if your body having been buried in the ground doesn't rot due to some persevering soil, biology or maybe some kind of body anti rotting feature like the Egyptians and lots of people do.

That your body will rot rests on fundamental assumptions of soil and biology.
But a smartarse did respond and you just proved it.

And my body will rot without preservatives etc.
1
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by Xhail)
1 + 1 = 2 ?
Ah this is an interesting one. The German philosopher immanuel kant believed mathematics was synthetic a posteriori, which means mathematics is not inherently true or false or right or wrong but requires empirical evidence.

How do you know 1+1 is two? You could put two blocks near each other and count them. The act of counting itself is analytic, you can conclude from making general observations a number which isn't in the question. For example we have two 1s but not a 2. But is it knowledge? Does it really tell us anything about the world? Does it not make certain numerical assumptions. It seems to me that simple sums like that also rest on fundamental assumptions we make about arithmetic.
1
reply
mphysical
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
The speed of light c is a constant, independent of the relative motion of the source
0
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by harrysbar)
But a smartarse did respond and you just proved it.

And my body will rot without preservatives etc.
Your subjective belief that I'm a smartarse wouldn't count as knowledge and I could have simply not responded. And that your body will rot is still based on assumptions of decay.
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by tashkent46)
Your subjective belief that I'm a smartarse wouldn't count as knowledge and I could have simply not responded. And that your body will rot is still based on assumptions of decay.
But you had to respond because a smartarse can't help their nature
0
reply
Xhail
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by tashkent46)
Ah this is an interesting one. The German philosopher immanuel kant believed mathematics was synthetic a posteriori, which means mathematics is not inherently true or false or right or wrong but requires empirical evidence.

How do you know 1+1 is two? You could put two blocks near each other and count them. The act of counting itself is analytic, you can conclude from making general observations a number which isn't in the question. For example we have two 1s but not a 2. But is it knowledge? Does it really tell us anything about the world? Does it not make certain numerical assumptions. It seems to me that simple sums like that also rest on fundamental assumptions we make about arithmetic.
Makes sense boss
0
reply
tashkent46
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by harrysbar)
But you had to respond because a smartarse can't help their nature
It's a thread about question I answered if that upsets you go elsewhere lol
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
That we can perceive what’s around us and make assumptions about it.
Last edited by Plantagenet Crown; 1 month ago
1
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by tashkent46)
It's a thread about question I answered if that upsets you go elsewhere lol
I'm not upset, I'm enjoying it
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (140)
18.16%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (78)
10.12%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (132)
17.12%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (109)
14.14%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (76)
9.86%
How can I be the best version of myself? (236)
30.61%

Watched Threads

View All