Is there such thing as “absolute fact”

Benj96

An “absolute fact” as I would best define it is a fact that can be regarded/ verified as true independently of or consistently through time.

In this sense the fact would have to transcend all points in space time for the duration of its existence. That is assuming time and space always existed. If that assumption is false then an “absolute fact” would have to transcend even this and be factual or true for all possible states. Perhaps it even has to go beyond possibility itself or at least encapsulate possibility, impossibility, the line inbetween, but that is probably out of reach or the scope of language to even explain in the first place.

Assuming ultimate fact may be attainable in a definitive form. The discussion of “absolute fact” is no less inherently quite difficult to preserve. For one we are animals of limited duration - we have lifespans and once they have expired we are no longer here to communicate or think about absolute fact.

We can write about it or document in a form more permanent than a human life in hope of conveying it and maintaining an understanding -say a transgenerational computer hard drive But then we encounter another myriad problems.

Namely; human error. In both defining in the first place in some perceivable understandable way, and in interpretation of said definition. We forget. Which requires reestablishment if “absolute fact”. We also use words and meanings in loose no objective ways. Not to mention the words and verbs we use to describe it in the first place are subject to linguistic evolution and soon become only interpretative as less and less people speak the language.

Secondly the media, imagery etc we use to convey messages is subject to cultural progression and the reshaping and leaps in knowledge, ideas and education with each passing generation. It seems any means by which to pass on information about absolute fact is doomed to change in form, mode and frequency/ accuracy of use over time.

How can we be sure that we can objectively maintain the absolute idea, or any idea for that matter through time in a changing Flux of humanity?

It is clear that the transition of time itself is an obstacle to truth about the universe - the reality , that we live in.

The issue lies really in information. Information is change. The flux of measurable or contrasting states, qualities and quantities. Without any dimension information cannot exist because it cannot happen (no time) and doesn’t have a place to happen (coordinates of some spatial dimension).

So can there be an absolute eternal fact? Or can there only be an absolute instantaneous fact that will be true for that point in time for all eternity - the present moment?

Aryamoy Mitra

Instantaneous truth, or truthlikeness even, seems to me as a more reliable judgement than infalliblism. You've already cited the inevitability of change in the refutation of absolute facts. If you're attempting to demonstrate an eternal truth, you can't. Knowledge doesn't consist of a component of foresight: it is tractable. In the information we garner, facts are rendered untrue through either instrumental or analytic improvement, eventually. This isn't because claims are false at their conception, but because the contexts in which they are ensconced are unavoidably going to change. Newton wasn't quite incorrect. He demonstrated a truth of existence, 300 years prior to Einstein illuminating a larger one.

Jack Cummins

↪Benj96

Fact can be seen as a concrete dimension but it all depends on perspectives and distortions too. We are assaulted by the baseline of factual reality, often wishing to retreat into a different reality. This can pave the way for outright lies or on a more subtle level it can lead to the shadow world of psychosis

What I am saying is not new but as human beings it is possible to break away from the world of facts according to our motives. Some facts are just unbearable and can lead us to create all kinds of alternatives, ranging from the ridiculous to mythic storytelling, because even if facts exist it is in a sphere of larger facts.

TheMadFool

↪Benj96

Statement E = There are no absolute eternal facts

E is either true or false

If E is false then there are absolute eternal facts

If E is true then it is the absolute eternal fact

Either way, there are absolute eternal facts

:chin:

Isaac

Statement E = There are no absolute eternal facts

E is either true or false — TheMadFool

You've begged the question. It being the case that E is either true or false assumes that there are absolute eternal facts (ie E must be either true or false). Without that assumption you cannot have the premise that E must be either true or false, E might be true sometimes but false others.

Friendly

To my mind the only absolute fact is my own consciousness. The rest can potentially be proven wrong over an unlimited time span. I know for certain (that is my subjective truth) that I experience. The rest of what we conceive to be facts could be explained away.

You've begged the question. It being the case that E is either true or false assumes that there are absolute eternal facts (ie E must be either true or false). Without that assumption you cannot have the premise that E must be either true or false, E might be true sometimes but false others. — Isaac

This kind of sums up my point!

Jack Cummins

↪TheMadFool

I read your reply to Benj 96 and it made me think while I was unable to sleep. What that led me to conclude was that there certain facts which are consensus, including ones including personal ones like, date of birth, country and some of the structures of one's life. Also, mathematics and basic aspects of geography etc. I think except in rare circumstances it would be pointless to argue against these.

But I would say they are the basic structure and that is where we get into the way in which fact and fiction get blurry. This is because life is socially constructed. History itself is a biased interplay of facts and interpretation. The history of religion is too, such as the development of Christianity being swayed by the Church leaders.

So, I am arguing that certain basics of fact could be seen as more or less absolutely but from this point the start of the fictive begins. And in the eternal scheme of life these fictive aspects may be just as important as any real objective facts. In many ways the fictions of life shape life our daily existence and contribute to the future.

KerimF

In brief, how an absolute fact is seen is always relative to the observer.
This leads us having the same fact being seen differently by different observers.
Therefore, in order to let many people (now in millions, if not billions) see a fact (usually a story; social, medical, religious or political) equally, big money (besides many other means) have to be invested first in spreading a version of it that the multitudes are supposed to believe.

TheMadFool

And in the eternal scheme of life these fictive aspects may be just as important as any real objective facts — Jack Cummins

You maybe onto something there...

Friendly

In brief, how an absolute fact is seen is always relative to the observer.
This leads us having the same fact being seen differently by different observers. — KerimF

I agree, this is my point about the only absolute face I know is the existence of my consciousness. An absolute fact surely has to be objective (if such a thing exists!)

What that led me to conclude was that there certain facts which are consensus, including ones including personal ones like, date of birth, country and some of the structures of one's life. Also, mathematics and basic aspects of geography etc. I think except in rare circumstances it would be pointless to argue against these. — Jack Cummins

I don't think a consensus constitutes an absolute fact, I agree it might not be productive to argue these things we think we know but it is interesting! Because all these things are experienced through our own psyche, we can't objectively challenge them as facts. They could be an illusion we can't comprehend.

I am so limited in my ability to comprehend the complexity of existence, therefore I can't really prove anything except my inability to prove anything!

TheMadFool

You've begged the question. It being the case that E is either true or false assumes that there are absolute eternal facts (ie E must be either true or false). Without that assumption you cannot have the premise that E must be either true or false, E might be true sometimes but false others. — Isaac

All I can say in response is the finite can't grasp the infinite.

KerimF

All I can say in response is the finite can't grasp the infinite. — TheMadFool

In perspective geometry, the infinite is brought to a finite piece of paper when two parallel straights are drawn for example :)

KerimF

What that led me to conclude was that there certain facts which are consensus, including ones including personal ones like, date of birth, country and some of the structures of one's life. — Jack Cummins

'My date of birth' is a fact which I heard of, but not lived (I wasn't conscious at that time :) ). I just trusted my parents about it.

'My country' is what some others may think it should be mine because also some others applied some other's rules to let it be mine :D
I personally see home wherever I live and my family whoever I live with.

I liked by these two simple examples showing that the way by which someone is aware of a fact is always relative to him (the observer)... much like ‘Relativity’ in modern Physics :)

TheMadFool

In perspective geometry, the infinite is brought to a finite piece of paper when two parallel straights are drawn for example :) — KerimF

Nice! :up:

unenlightened

An “absolute fact” as I would best define it is a fact that can be regarded/ verified as true independently of or consistently through time. — Benj96

All you have there is a perfectly ordinary fact with a place and time specified.

The cat is on the mat. - An ordinary fact.
The cat is on the mat in unenlightened's living room at 4.15 pm 26 Oct. 2020. A Benj96 absolute fact, true for all time and all space.

Or does it have to be an absolute cat?

KerimF

An “absolute fact” as I would best define it is a fact that can be regarded/ verified as true independently of or consistently through time. — Benj96

Doesn’t this mean a 'living cat' (now dead :( ) cannot be seen as an absolute fact?

Kenosha Kid

So can there be an absolute eternal fact? — Benj96

What sort of answer are you after? Something absolutely factual?

Statement E = There are no absolute eternal facts

E is either true or false

If E is false then there are absolute eternal facts

If E is true then it is the absolute eternal fact

Either way, there are absolute eternal facts — TheMadFool

:100:

You've begged the question. It being the case that E is either true or false assumes that there are absolute eternal facts (ie E must be either true or false). Without that assumption you cannot have the premise that E must be either true or false, E might be true sometimes but false others. — Isaac

There cannot be sometimes absolute eternal facts. If it is sometimes absolute but not always, it is not eternally absolutely. If it is in some cases eternal, in others not, it is not absolutely eternal. If both hold and no other, it is an absolute eternal fact that there are no absolute eternal facts. Reductio ad absurdum there must be absolute eternal facts.

Isaac

If it is sometimes absolute but not always, it is not eternally absolutely. If it is in some cases eternal, in others not, it is not absolutely eternal. — Kenosha Kid

Are those two facts absolute and eternal?

Kenosha Kid

Are those two facts absolute and eternal? — Isaac

Yes, reductio ad absurdum. The only out is that the language we're employing is meaningless such that an eternal fact need not hold eternally and an absolute fact need not hold absolutely.

Isaac

Yes, reductio ad absurdum. — Kenosha Kid

You performed the reductio on the conclusion, not the premises. Your premises are definitions which, by experience are neither absolute nor eternal.

Kenosha Kid

You performed the reductio on the conclusion, not the premises. Your premises are definitions which, by experience are neither absolute nor eternal. — Isaac

The two facts in question are not premises or definitions.

Isaac

The two facts in question are not premises or definitions. — Kenosha Kid

They seem like both to me.

If it is sometimes absolute but not always, it is not eternally absolute — Kenosha Kid

...seems like both a premise (of your reductio) and a definition of what 'eternally' means. Likewise with the statement about absoluteness.

So we end up saying that there must be eternal absolute facts because we have the words 'eternal', 'absolute' and 'fact', and this is just what they mean. I'm not necessarily saying there's anything wrong with that, by the way, just that it's question begging. We cannot state it without already assuming it in the language we use to state it, we haven't discovered anything new, just the assumptions we work with.

Kenosha Kid

So we end up saying that there must be eternal absolute facts because we have the words 'eternal', 'absolute' and 'fact', and this is just what they mean. I'm not necessarily saying there's anything wrong with that, by the way, just that it's question begging. We cannot state it without already assuming it in the language we use to state it, we haven't discovered anything new, just the assumptions we work with. — Isaac

Not at all. Ordinary usage of the words is assumed without apparent ambiguity. An eternal fact is not defined as "a statement that is true irrespective of when it is evaluated of which there must be at least one". Similarly for absolute facts. That would be begging the question.

Isaac

An eternal fact is not defined as "a statement that is true irrespective of when it is evaluated of which there must be at least one" — Kenosha Kid

The begging of the question is not that the definition contains the assumption that there must be at least one such, it is in the assumption that it the properties of the mutually exclusive and exhaustive set thus presented is an 'eternal fact'.

Harry Hindu

Statement E = There are no absolute eternal facts

E is either true or false
— TheMadFool

You've begged the question. It being the case that E is either true or false assumes that there are absolute eternal facts (ie E must be either true or false). Without that assumption you cannot have the premise that E must be either true or false, E might be true sometimes but false others. — Isaac

Did you not just demonstrate that there are absolute eternal facts - that E being true or false is dependent upon the assumption that there are eternal facts. Can E ever be true or false without having assumed that there are eternal facts?

A. TheMadFool states that "There are no absolute eternal facts" is either true or false
B. Issac states that that is begging the question.

B. is either true or false.

If it is neither, then what use is the statement? What purpose did you have in stating it?

One could even say that if it is neither then B. isn't about A at all. You both would be talking past each other.

Isaac

↪Harry Hindu

In order to demonstrate that a position is begging the question it only need appear to be the case here and now and the position holds. It doesn't require that my conclusion is an eternal and absolute fact, it might turn out not to be the case tomorrow, that wouldn't make any difference to the refutation today.

EricH

Are there other categories of facts besides "absolute facts"? E.g. Are there any facts that are not absolute? Are there facts that are green? Unhappy? Ambiguous?

If not, then we can toss the "absolute" part of that phrase and simply ask "Is there such a thing as a fact?"

As an aside, certain politicians would have us believe that there "alternate facts" - but that is outside the scope of this particular discussion (I hope). :razz:

Kenosha Kid

The begging of the question is not that the definition contains the assumption that there must be at least one such, it is in the assumption that it the properties of the mutually exclusive and exhaustive set thus presented is an 'eternal fact'. — Isaac

I've never heard of this as begging the question. Pretty much every theorem ever proven would be an example, since the definitions of all terms must be such that they yield the conclusion of the theorem exactly.

Harry Hindu

In order to demonstrate that a position is begging the question it only need appear to be the case here and now and the position holds. It doesn't require that my conclusion is an eternal and absolute fact, it might turn out not to be the case tomorrow, that wouldn't make any difference to the refutation today. — Isaac

Then it is an eternal, absolute fact that at one moment in the universe's history this was the case.

So it appears that you can never NOT assume that some statement is either true or false as these are inherent properties of statements.

If a statement is neither true or false then it isnt a statement at all. Its just scribbles on a screen.

180 Proof

[C]an there be an absolute eternal fact? Or can there only be an absolute instantaneous fact that will be true for that point in time for all eternity - the present moment? — Benj96

Define "absolute".
Define "eternal".
Define "fact".

If by "absolute eternal fact" what is meant is 'an event (or thing) the absence or negation of which is a self-contradiction', then I think - no compelling examples come to mind - the answer to the OP is "no".

If, however, you mean something else (more nuanced or abstract), tell us - begin with defining terms above.

Isaac

I've never heard of this as begging the question. Pretty much every theorem ever proven would be an example, since the definitions of all terms must be such that they yield the conclusion of the theorem exactly. — Kenosha Kid

Maybe. But it's really not that complicated. Any logical argument you bring to bear to show there are eternal absolute facts can only do so by assuming the truth-preserving relationship of the modus it uses is itself an eternal absolute fact. There's nothing wrong with that, no cause to stop theorising or throw logic away, but we assume it, we cannot prove it with itself.

Is there such thing as “absolute fact”

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions