Originally Posted by Scott_Tarlow
All of which is good and well, but I am not making an argument for science, I am making an argument that a truth holds no universal claim.
And I am making an argument that there is a universal claim to truth, and it is science.
It something that you believe or recognize to be true. You cannot vote truth. You can say someone is wrong, but does that necessarily change their opinion, do you change their opinion? No they do.
This argument only applies if they think they're right. In the case of the colorblind, they should be familiar with their problem, and that they do not perceive in the same way a "normal" person does. Their truth and the universal truth can coexist.
You could say green is green all day, but they could say green is red and they could believe it to be true and if you were to ask them if it were true they would say yes. In their reference frame green is red. In their reference frame, the laws of physics may not even exist.
You seem like a smart guy, and that's why this comment depresses me. This is typical teenager philosophy fare. My brother makes this argument all the time. I just look at him sideways and tell him to do his science homework.
When I start seeing kids floating into the sky because they believe really hard, maybe I'll change my mind, but for now I call bull**** on your philosophy. You can't change reality with a frame of reference. You'll still get dragged down by gravity.
Because a truth is an idea, and all of our ideas are inherently flawed no two frames of references will hold all the same truths. So which frame of reference is true? Both of them to their respective holders.
So if you flip a coin, no two people will think it landed on the same side? How many sides do your coins have?
Science does not prove green to be green. It proves that a certain wavelength of light will be perceived the same way as long as a reference frame has not been changed. For example, in reference frame A the length of a photon could be 1032 nanometers but in another frame of reference it could be 531 nanometeres easily, depending on the physical attributes of that reference frame.
Science proves that all shades of the exact same color have the same wavelength. What our brains perceive that color as depends on the brain, but science can account for that, too. Then there's all that relativity stuff, where light is a constant speed regardless of relative frame. Actually, relativity sort of kills your "no two frames the same" argument because of that. Also, photons have no length
If there is an absolute truth, again I don't think there is a scientific argument for absolute truth, because there is no evidence explicitly saying there is or even suggesting it. In fact, even if it does exist, science definitely suggests that we will never know it, for it could exist in some demension we could not comprehend, as we only live in 3.
Well, I do. Huh, I guess our frames of reference are just different, so we're both spot on accurate in our assumptions.