There must be vast numbers of facts about the stars and planets in this galaxy and other galaxies which have not, and may never be, discovered. — Janus

Not if one defines facts as statements or descriptions. What exists exists, but in order to get to a true statement describing some state of affairs accurately, you need an observer observing. That is my position, and it is commonplace.

We know there are facts yet to be discovered and facts that will never be discovered. — Janus

And you know that how? It looks like a silly profession of faith to me.

But we are in a fucked up world, and, historically speaking, crisis is the most opportune time for the tyrant to make a move. — Merkwurdichliebe

If you live in a tyranny, I feel sorry for you.

That the table is 3.0±0.1m is either true or false. — Banno

My point entirely. The two concepts of accuracy and truth are tightly connected.

how do you differentiate between the erroneous observations and the correct ones? — Banno

By doing more observations, usually.

As explained in detail, some facts are true in virtue of the institutions in which they occur. Such facts are not true in virtue of observations. — Banno

Right, and if you say so two thousand times, maybe it will turn true.

As long as the discussion is limited to philosophy forums, there should be no problem. — baker

There's no 'problem' per se in voicing opposition to whatever policy but I believe that in times of crisis, 1) one should give some slack to political leaders, their job is hard nowadays and you and I wouldn't be able to do any better; and 2) consider the need for a little social cohesion, for a bit more attention to the public good, i.e. more civic sense and responsibility to the collective is required in times of crisis than otherwise I think.

Certainly, spreading unfounded suspicions and rumors is beyond the pale, IMO, here or anywhere.

You need to serve somebody alright. It may be the Devil or it may be the Lord. So be careful which master you serve. Beware who is spreading rumors, and why. Who's your handler?

But look at Israel. Sky high vaccination rates achieved early on, yet the vast majority of covid patients requring hospital care are fully vaccinated. — baker

The issue is the variants, Delta mainly in Israel. This thing is mutating fast. So in terms if vaccination, it will require annual shots. Updates of the latest variants downloaded to your immune system via RNA updates. The technology allows it. And vaccination is not the only tool a nation should use. Masks should remain on the nose when in crowds or indoors, etc.

Some Croatian social scientists say that the reason why many people don't get vaccinated is because they don't trust the government. — baker

So a guy spoke on TV, huh?

LOL. Flattery will get you everywhere with me.

Reading and writing in the language for three decades now, including on


The English translation doesn't rhyme and has no rythme so it's less pleasing to the ear than the French original in classic octosyllabics, but evidently the situation is similar whenever an English poem is translated: the translation always sounds weak in comparison with the English original.

You can translate the words, but you cannot translate the music of the words. And that is precisely why I was reluctant to put Les Passantes through the process. I like it a bit too much.

No no no, English is a great language.

No. HIV, poverty, tuberculosis, malaria, childhood obesity, heart disease, cancer, mental health issues, are all still ongoing causes of death and debilitation and we're still largely ignoring them (relative to covid).

We're not doing better, we've just created a system in which the cause with the most Facebook likes gets the fucking cavalry whilst everything else gets the home guard. — Isaac

Same old same old. It was already the case with AIDS. What happened with the creation of the Global Fund on Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, was that instead of funding and capacitating national health systems able to tackle various health threats in, say, Africa, the Fund invested in dedicated AIDS-specific delivery channels (NGOs in particular), on the assumption that this was the real, important crisis, and that national health systems were often corrupt and ineffective... Decades later, people wish they had addressed the weaknesses of those health systems, because new threats keep coming.

COVID is not the big one. I agree with you on this. It is a rehearsal for the big one.

Good resource. I've tried to edit that a bit in the bellow.

The Passers-by
Antoine Pol

I dedicate this poem
To all of those women
We love for a secret moment
To those we just half-see
Whom a different fate leads away
And we never see them again

To her we see appear
One second at her window
And who vanishes swiftly
Yet whose slender outline
Was so slim and so fine
That our heart is left blooming

To the fellow-traveller
Whose eyes, a charming landscape
Make us feel the way shorter,
Whom we alone, maybe, understand
But who we let get off the train
Without even brushing her hand

To the slim and supple waltzer
Who seemed sad and fretful
During some carnival night
Who wished to remain masked
And who never showed up again
To whirl in another ball

To those already taken
And who, living drab days
Near too different a person
Have let you -- useless folly --
Perceive the melancholy
Of their despairing future

To those shy lovers
Who remained silent
And yet are still mourning you
To those who went away
From you sad and lonely
Victim of your stupid pride

Dear images barely sighted
Short-lived, arrested hopes
You'll be forgotten tomorrow
If happiness ever comes
One rarely remembers
All the episodes along the way

Yet, if one has missed one's life,
One muses about, longingly,
Towards those half-sighted joys
Those kisses one didn't dare take
Those eyes never seen again

So then, in bleak and weary nights
As one peoples one's solitude
With the ghosts of memories
One sobs over the absent lips
Of all those passers-by
One failed to hold on to

Look who's the translator now!

Legend has it that Brassens discovered the poem by buying Pol's used poetry book on a flea market, by chance. Pol was totally unknown.

So we are making progress?

Remind me again of the massive global effort to tackle the HIV crisis? — Isaac

There was a global effort to tackle the AIDS crisis. Condoms everywhere, lots of communication, ARV drugs made affordable to the poor, the Global Fund against AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria created and well funded.

You could try a little less cynicism.

Interesting. One more author to review.

Nobody heard him, the dead man,
But still he lay moaning:
I was much further out than you thought
And not waving but drowning.

Poor chap, he always loved larking
And now he's dead
It must have been too cold for him his heart gave way,
They said.

Oh, no no no, it was too cold always
(Still the dead one lay moaning)
I was much too far out all my life
And not waving but drowning.


Florence Margaret "Stevie" Smith

it doesn't follow from that that there are no unobserved facts. — Janus

You have examples of unobserved facts?

1. Accurate is problematic. What is it that makes an observation accurate? — Banno

This has been answered already. Accuracy is -- if you wish -- the quantitative version of truth. Truth is black or white, yes or no, but accuracy goes by degree; one can be more or less accurate but not more or less true (there's the concept of "true enough", which means "accurate enough"). The concept of accuracy is therefore apt for natural sciences, perhaps more so than the concept of truth, because in natural science facts are usually understood as quantitative measurements, always coming with a certain margin of imprecision.

2. An observation might be made that is erroneous. That is, not true. — Banno

In this case it is an inaccurate observation, ergo not a fact. Beside, the way to tell if a previous observation was accurate or not is to redo the observation (or a similar one) and compare the results. Therefore one corrects inaccurate observations via other, more accurate observations. Not via more theory or revelations from the gods.

3. Observations are embedded in theory. Facts on this account must be dependent on other facts. Not a killer, this, but still relevant. — Banno

I addressed this already. The Duhem-Quine thesis (nothing to see with Durkheim, and the correct order is with Duhem first because he stated it first, historically) is correct, if a bit trite. It is only stating the obvious, that one cannot test only one hypothesis in isolation from the whole theoretical framework underpinning it. So yes, there is no observation without some prior enquiry shaping and motivating that observation, and "pure observation" (so to speak, meaning observation not based on any theory) is simply impossible. And yet, astronomers still look through their telescopes, biologists still peer through their microscopes, and people still keep their eyes open when they drive, in spite of the Duhem-Quine thesis... As you conceded, it's not a killer at all.

4. Counter examples. That the area of a circle is given by r² is a fact but is not an observation. That the bishop always moved diagonally is a fact but not an observation. It will not do to claim that we learn these by observation, since learning something does not make each a fact — Banno

Again, addressed already. Perhaps you can explain how you know for a fact that the bishop always moved diagonally, rather than like the rook, or like the al fil piece that predated the bishop ? Was this knowledge handed over to you by a revelation from God? Or was it an instinct perhaps?

Glad we agree.

Or at least, let natural selection run its course.

Did everyone decide that "fact" and "true" are two word that mean exactly the same thing? Or do they mean different things? And if different, would someone be good enough to tell me what, or point me to the post that has that? — tim wood

My take is that two words never mean the exact same thing, otherwise there wouldn't exist two words. In this case, a fact is not just a true statement: it is a well established true statement, relatively easy to verify empirically by oneself.

Well, I don't see a point in going over the arguments against your position yet again — Banno

You have made no argument against my position whatsoever. Maybe you think you did, but as always you only gesticulated in the general direction of Wittgenstein...

But maybe you can understand what I am saying if I take a very simple example: do you often drive a car with your eyes close? Does the driver of a car benefit (or not) from keeping his eyes open? Think about it for a day or two... No rush.

Do you now rescind this? — Banno

Of course not...

You claim that facts are only ever the result of observation. That claim has been thoroughly critiqued and found wanting. — Banno

Only superficially so. It is a truism that any observation takes place within a certain theoretical framework. So what? The data is still collected, and useful.

Sure, it's an historical fact that the bishop moves diagonally. It is also an institutional fact. That it is true is not dependent on observation.

It is: people learn the rules of chess by observation and imitation. That is precisely how they know, and can verify anytime they want, how the bishop moves: by asking others, by reading books.

... since the 15th century... in the standard (or rather European) rules... — Olivier5

See what I did here? I contextualized the fact within its theoretical, historical, and geographical milieux. In doing so, it was made more of a fact, not less of a fact. More precise, more informative.

Facts have this in common with objective reality, with empirical, stubborn reality, that they are always local. Facts are always somewhere, and some when. Even the formula for the area of the circle is only true within a certain context: that of Euclidian geometry.

We have to give up the distinction between fat and theory. — Banno

This is one of the best things you ever said. Fat is intrinsic to good theory. Who wants lean and meagre theories?

As for the rules of chess as we know them, they stabilized around the 15th century in Europe. Before that at some point, the bishop did not exist yet. It was still called al fil, the elephant in Arabic, and the elephant did already move diagonally but I believe it could jump, like the knight and moved only by two squares.

So it is a historical fact, well established by the study of ancient Arabic and European chess books, that since the 15th century or so the bishop moves diagonally in the standard (or rather European) rules of chess.

Les Passantes (the Passers-by)



Sorry, can't translate this, it'd be too hard. A poem by Antoine Pol sung by Brassens, with a very nice (and very feminist) video by Charlotte Abramow. The lyrics are about all the women whom one man met for a few fleeting moments throughout his life, and dared not approach, and how he remembers them later. It's sounds awful, said like this...

Oh "the Left" is the problem now... For fuck sake, do you guys ever try to make sense?

What threat are the unvaccinated to the vaccinated? — Harry Hindu

These free wheelers consume resources which could be put to better use.

It’s natural to feel that way, but everyone has to be treated equally, I think. — Wayfarer

Of course, I was just venting.

Those people were forced to pay for other people's poor decisions their entire lives, and when they need the help you wish to deny them? — Tzeentch

Can I have what you're smoking?

I wish we could just let the terminal cretins live or die on their own term, triage them out of healthcare somehow. Save resources for the rest of us. But no can't do of course, our compassionate societies make sure that even the most antisocial distrustful lying cretins are cared for...

You're playing the tough guy on a philosophy forum. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that. — Tzeentch

You are easily confused.

From the other thread (thanks @Wayfarer):

The Unbelievable Grimness of HermanCainAward, the Subreddit That Catalogs Anti-Vaxxer COVID Deaths

I'll leave you to it. — Isaac

Get your shot.

You said you were trying not to undermine trust in your government by taking the vaccine, I was pointing out that holding the government to account is the usual method of not undermining trust, rather than the taking of prophylactic medicines. — Isaac

Nothing to do with the government. It's the whole health sector we are talking about. And not during a pandemic. Sowing doubt for no good reason in situations of crisis is antisocial.

What exactly is it about the structure, history and objectives of your government that gives you such confidence in it's magnanimity? — Isaac

Technically I live in Italy, but it changes nothing to my argument. The Italian health sector and government did in fact better than in France in my assessment. I trust both countries' institutions, by and large, are well-meaning, if often inefficient.

Especially now. It's a national security crisis. Whatever their turpitudes, I trust that the government, the health professionals, the economic actors, e tutti quanti do not want to die. They don't want their parents to die, nor their children. They want to get out of this crisis.

I do want this as well. My neighbours, my colleagues, my friends, my family want this as well.

Vaccination gives us a tool to work to that end. Collectively.

So we speak to one another about the pros and cons. It's not entirely entirely certain and all proven, it's a new technology after all, but it seems to reduce both incidence and gravity. But we GET it. It's a necessary leap of faith. Yes there's some social pressure to get vaccinated, as there should be. It's a mater of survival.

Those laypeople who go with a minority view are almost always doing so for emotional reasons, as is the case with anti-vaxxers. — Xtrix

:100:

Just finished it.

SPOILERS AHEAD :smile:

The two last sentences are a gem:

When Rome was in danger, it was the cackling of the sacred geese that saved the Capitol. I am only a professorial goose, consecrated with a cap and gown and fed at a college table ; but cackling is my job, and cackle I will.

Yes, and you can do it without taking your shot too, making the taking of your shot entirely inconsequential to the project. — Isaac

If it is totally inconsequential to the problem at hand, why did you bring up "holding the government into account"?

To what extent did a lack of trust figure in their complicity, do you think? — Isaac

The fact of the mater is that trust of the average citizens in one another, in one's neighbours, is close to zero in the DRC. This sentiment may be well-founded in their case but it still creates a lot of problems.

That such a sentiment be justified in Congo doesn't make it justified where I live, where reasonable levels of trust in one's neighbours, as well as in public institutions still exist, and for good reason, and where this trust is an asset.

:nerd:

Holding a government to account according to high standards of transparency and freedom from corporate influence is traditionally held to be a mechanism for increasing trust, not undermining it. — Isaac

You can do that and still take your shot.

Did the problems with the DRC reside in Kabila or the populace? — Isaac

Good question. The short answer is both.

The story of how Zaïre / DRC became a failed state is best told in "Dancing in the Glory of Monsters", by Jason K. Stearns. The title is a quote from Kabila the elder, the limp guerillero himself. When he reached Kinshasa at the head of his group, freeing the nation from the grip of Mobutu, he made a speech in which he told the Congolese that they shared the guilt of the Mobutu regime, because they had done nothing to oppose it. Instead, he told them, they had been dancing in the glory of the monster.

Needless to say, Mobutu is not the only monster in this story. Hence the plural in the title.