Endymion said:
Let's talk about theory and fact. There is no such thing as a fact in the strict definition. For example, that you have a computer sitting in front of you as you read this is not a fact. That you are a human is not a fact.
They are not facts because you cannot logically prove that the computer is in front of you. You cannot logically prove 100% that you are human. Here's a mental exercise. Prove to me that this isn't the Matrix and that the computer in front of you isn't a trick played by superior artifical intelligence. It's impossible to prove that, which means that there is a chance that the computer is not in front of you. Therefore, that the computer is in front of you is no longer an undeniable fact.
Interesting argument, but I am not entirely comfortable with your denial of facts and the means of proving them. Why? Please allow me to define the meaning of fact in a "strict" (at least straightforward) definition and demonstrate how facts can be basically proved.
Facts are either made or done. Perhaps both. They exist in two basic categories: things and events. Let's talk about Egyptian pyramids. They belong to the category of things. The Egyptian pyramids were built thousands of years ago. This is a supposed event. How do I prove that Egyptian pyramids actually exist? Simple. I pay them a visit.I travel to Egypt and look at them on the west bank of the Nile River. With my own eyes. If, by any reason, I believe I am hallucinating the pyramids, I can touch them to verify that they are real. Being the stubborn being I am, if I believe I am touching the pyramids in my mind, I can bang my head on the wall violently and continuously for an indeterminate period of time until my head bleeds. Or I give myself a concussion and lose some precious brain cells. Is the blood real? At this point, I would be convinced enough that the pyramids do exist because I just injured myself. I call this experience gathering direct evidence. Alternatively, I could save myself money and ask a trustyworthy eyewitness, someone like my older brother who have seen them personally, to assure me that the Egyptian pyramids do exist and are located in Egypt. Or I could go to the neighborhood library and open up National Geographic, a well-known respected scientific magazine, to examine the dazzling photographs of the pyramids and decide that the pictures are sufficient enough to establish its reality. I call this gathering indirect evidence. Through direct and/or indirect evidence, I have established the factuality of the Egyptian pyramids.
Now for the event. The Egyptian pyramids were built thousands of years ago by paid craftsmen. We claim this as a fact. How do you justify this statement? How do you know the pyramids were not built by little green intelligent creatures from an unknown galaxy far away? This is an event that happened long before any of us were born, so we can rule out the possibility that we were there when they built them. There are no living witnesses to verify this event, either, as they are centuries-long dead. There is no direct proof, period. We will have to settle for indirect evidence, then. A whole pool of scholars-- archaeologists, historians, engineers, architects, researchers-- have studied the pyramids thoroughly and based on the evidence of exacavated skeletons (including crushed limbs from the weight of limestone), grafitti on the walls, etc., they came up with a reasonable theory of who built them. They also came up with a theory on when, how and why they did it. On the basis of the factuality of the evidence, we can establish that the Egyptian pyramids were built by paid craftsmen thousands of years ago. You can call this a historical fact.
We do not have to rule out the possibility of extraterrestials, though. It is your choice to decide who built the pyramids and when it happened, and how to determine the reality of the event. Do keep in mind that the majority of us do not experience public events like the pyramids directly and therefore must rely on indirect evidence to believe that they happened. I was not there when Slobodan Milosevic had his fatal heart attack in his lonely cell, and good chances are, neither were you, Endymion.
Facts are either objective and subjective. Both things and events are objective facts because they are universal knowledge. The pyramids are an example. Now, what would constitute a subjective fact? Ah, here's one: I'm hungry. I have not eaten all day. My stomach's growling. I am the one experiencing the hunger, so I have direct evidence of the factuality of my hunger. You have no evidence of my hunger, unless you were here in person and you could hear my stomach growling, which is entirely moot in our case. I have no means of proving my hunger, perhaps except exhibiting manifest symptoms of a starved human being. Thus you have to take my word that I am hungry. You can choose to believe me or not believe me. You may think I am making all of this up and I am not really hungry. You can only establish the factuality of my hunger on the sole basis of my trustworthiness. All of this is the same idea if you claim to own an Armani suit and can only prove this exclusively by your verbal testimony (assuming that existant circumstances do not allow you to show me your hypothetical suit in person).
I'm done for now. I would love to discuss this to a more in-depth detail, but I am really hungry and need to do my homework. Have I made any sense in my post? Has anyone understood what I was trying to say? I certainly hope so.
I saw the PBS show that they found the communities where worker lived. they don't looks like they are slave laborers. They had everything like other non-slave community have. bread and waters even fish. since there are stores and factories around the community. 