Pommer said:

Romans had the Coliseum/gladiators; we have YouTube.

Click to expand...

But the bread is increasingly more expensive.

Pommer said:

We already had the Office of the Inspectors General that was purged, (probably so that Musk could ferret out which of the fired Inspectors General was working for the “deep state”), to do continuous investigations and audits to minimize waste, fraud and abuse.

“Waste, fraud and abuse” are the “weapons-of-mass-destruction” of our time; they ain’t “there”, (in anywhere near the amounts that would have to be realized that would have a significant effect.

We do spend a lot and most of it is necessary and accounted for, “WF&A”?, a bogeyman made out of money.

Click to expand...

Yeah, just like ”Trump is a threat to our democracy” was the weapon of mass destruction under Biden (literally, considering all the people who threatened to kill Trump (some almost did)), and we don’t even have a democracy. Meanwhile hiring 130,000 federal government workers to just add more wasteful expenditures to the list of stuff to have to get rid of. We have no need for the top-heavy, citizen-hating government that we have.

It was about 3.30am to 5am here. I slept right through it.

But I found a blood orange on the internet which is close to the real thing.

Pommer said:

I’m getting tired of the constant ridicule my work here.

Click to expand...

I bet that won't slow you down any. Lol.

Pommer said:

Look up the origin of the term “redskin”, (in referring to America’s indigenous peoples).

Click to expand...

We are not a racist nation and there is nothing holding BIPOC people from succeeding.

Pommer said:

I’m saying it shouldn’t matter where people are born. Or what they look like.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I agree.

FutureAndAHope said:

Choices are found all throughout scripture. They are real choices, not mock ones. Choices have consequences. Take the following example from Job, it states that based on the person's choice, they either bring for themselves spiritual life, or spiritual death:

Job 36:9-12 Then He tells them their work and their transgressions—That they have acted defiantly. He also opens their ear to instruction, And commands that they turn from iniquity. If they obey and serve Him, They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures. But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge.

Jesus extends the offer of Salvation to all, but our willingness, or lack of it, are important.

Mat 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!

Our choice or obedience is also important to receiving the Holy Spirit.

Joh 14:15-16 "If you love Me, keep My commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever—

Joh 14:22-24 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.

Note the order of receiving the Father's love (above) it comes only after we are obedient to God's word. There is an action we take in response to God's offer of salvation.

Click to expand...

When God speaks of desiring that all would come to him and not wishing that any should die, those are scriptures showing the heart of God. That is a different thing from the plan of salvation that he put in place and elucidated in John 6.

The choices we make are not free as was Adam’s choice in the Garden of Eden because we have a fallen nature (thanks to Adam’s use of his free-will choice) and can only make choices from that fallen nature until the time comes when we are redeemed (and thus have a redeemed nature). Once we are redeemed and have the gift of the Holy Spirit to guide us, we can make free-will choices. While we are slaves to sin, we cannot make free-will choices. We can make choices, but they are not free-will. There are too many scriptures where this is made clear. Prior to being redeemed, men have evil thoughts all the time, we require a Savior.

AV1611VET said:

You sure do.

Click to expand...

Do you know what that reason is?

Servus said:

What should be changed is the Department of the Interior to the Department of the Exterior, since it's in charge of everything outdoors.

Click to expand...

It’s better than the proposed name change it “Department of Hey Everybody, Look Over Here.”

essentialsaltes said:

The formal renaming of the department would require Congress to act

“We’re just going to do it. I’m sure Congress will go along if we need that. I don’t think we even need that,” Trump said last month.

Click to expand...

Welcome to “Who’s Line is it Anyway?” where the rules are made up and the points don’t matter.

Tuur said:

By your words, the prayer of a leftist is like the Aesop fable of the man who prayed to Hercules about his broken wagon, and Hercules came and made the man fix it. It's the implication that prayer is only effective if we ourselves act to answer it. Meanwhile, I saw God keep me and my family safe when a hurricane went where it wasn't forecast, and there was absolutely nothing we could do with our own hands to accomplish that.

So, of course, the left screeches that "Oh, it's all these wicked guns that leap into hands and make people do terrible things." All these magic guns. Magic they must be, for it's the gun that's treated as the cause and not the wickedness in the heart of the one who uses them for evil. So it is that the "solution" is to prevent people from owning firearms and never once asking why someone thought it was proper to gun down their fellowman.

Here is the terrible truth: The cause behind these incidents is the spiritual condition of the heart of the one who does them. That being the case, someone so inclined will seek out any means of doing so. Not having one means does not preclude having another. The only thing that prevents that is to change the spiritual condition of the heart, and that is beyond the power of any man or woman or law. That can only come from God.

Odd that the one thing the Left doesn't want is a return to religious instruction in schools. Maybe I'm drawing a false correlation, but when we had such, these things didn't happen. But this, like prayer, isn't seen as a solution. You could put us all in prison-life hives where every aspect of our lives are regulated, and I guarantee someone would still shove a shive into someone's side, because none of that can change the heart.

Or perhaps the fear, deep down, is what God will do. The prayer "Your will be done" is a scary thing. When we invite God in, some things we might not want dealt with with be dealt with, if we're honest to Him.

Click to expand...

This was a school that had religious instruction, and the gunman had ties to it. In fact, that is a pretty common theme in religious school shootings.

But hey, if you want religious instruction to return to schools, why not? Maybe people learning about the core tenants of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Wicca/Paganism, and other religions will bring some perspective to people who lack worldviews outside of their own.

Michie said:

Last week, the shooter in Minneapolis of little children in a Catholic church-school during mass was discovered to have written on one of his weapons, “Where is your god [sic].” He used a picture of Jesus on his target in practice before the big day of shooting last Wednesday.

And now the left says to us in effect: “Don’t pray, just prey.” The last part refers to allowing unfettered evil to flourish — to continue to prey on the weak and vulnerable.

As Gary Bauer noted last Thursday: “Satan wrote the script for the atrocities that transpired yesterday at a Minneapolis Catholic church and school. The transgender shooter’s message, ‘Where’s your God now,’ wasn’t referring to Allah. It was referring to the God of the Bible, the God Catholics, Jews, and Protestants worship. The only God, by the way. ‘Where’s your God now’ was Satan mocking God.”

It’s amazing to see how swift the condemnation from the Left was against even the idea of prayers — as if prayers alone were the solution offered to try and stop these things. They do hint at the solution: to get back to the knowledge of God, the one who is there and who will hold us all accountable one day.

As to the condemnation of prayer, consider these examples:

• Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frei, who almost single-handedly destroyed his city in the wake of the George Floyd riots, spoke of prayer as if it were nothing. After all, the children in the church-school were literally playing when the bullets began to fly.

Continued below.

The Left belittles prayer. Are they right?

I think we have no clue how many times God spares us from the complete ravages of sinful attempts to kill

www.christianpost.com

Click to expand...

I have not heard a single person belittle prayer. None of these “examples” even show somebody mocking prayer. The closest I heard is people pointing out that if shootings were the result of lack of God in schools and these kids were literally praying, what’s the excuse going to be this time.

I’m absolutely positive that people mock prayer, but (especially with this story), it’s not even close to being widespread or standard. This is just one of the articles written to feed the “Liberals are what you should fear and hate” narrative so many use as a crutch for all things.

Pommer said:

Polite people know when their presence isn’t welcome and stay away.

That sounds swell, we should try that maybe, once.
See what “happens”?

Click to expand...

I don’t blame anybody for not coming. I barely want to be here right now myself.

FredVB said:

With wisdom we avoid the foolishness, which is around out there,

Click to expand...

Understood! But, When you are committed to providing for a hungry family, you have to remain in the workforce amongst those very swine. And the type of witnessing I relied on in the dozens of shops I worked in came back with confirmation to me time and again, such as apologizing to me for speaking in course language, as though I should decide FOR THEM, what was considered wholesome logic. Again, most always in the same witnessing of 1 Peter 3:1. If after the Lord brings them to heel in this manner, I know they have responded to the light He gave. And this isn't the same as a child of God who ''walk in the council of the ungodly''. It is walking in patience and longsuffering of those many ''hairs of the head'' details He is capable of keeping track of concerning OUR heart and walk.

Hvizsgyak said:

Hey, you remembered me .

Click to expand...

I remembered the news article, but not the person who shared it. My memory is good enough to remember a lot of facts, but abysmal with name/conversation connection… As anybody here (and IRL) can attest to.

Thank you so much for your trust and for asking how to help. As a servant of God, I am already working on the ground with the affected Christian families here in Pakistan. Our community has been hit very hard by the floods, and sadly, the government and surrounding society often overlook us.
I want to be very clear and honest: we do need urgent support in food, clean water, clothes, and shelter, especially as winter is near. But I also want to respect the rules of this forum. That is why I am preparing a proper and transparent way through a Christian website where anyone who feels led by God can give safely and with confidence. I will share the details very soon.

In the meantime, your prayers and your faith in me as a brother in Christ mean a lot. If you feel led to support, please know your help will directly reach those who are in desperate need.

With gratitude in Christ,
Pastor Waris

FreeinChrist said:

That is such a lie, and a flame to all the Left.

Most I know on the Left feel prayer is important, and thoughts - but it is not enough. It is like God is saying, "DO something and I will bless it." He expects us to act. We could enact common sense gun laws for example. We could make the gun owner legally liable for the actions of the one using it - such as the parents who don't adequately lock up their guns or the ones who give their troubled teen a gun. We could stop the sale of the part that turns a simpler gun into a repeater. (Can't think of the name).

Click to expand...

By your words, the prayer of a leftist is like the Aesop fable of the man who prayed to Hercules about his broken wagon, and Hercules came and made the man fix it. It's the implication that prayer is only effective if we ourselves act to answer it. Meanwhile, I saw God keep me and my family safe when a hurricane went where it wasn't forecast, and there was absolutely nothing we could do with our own hands to accomplish that.

So, of course, the left screeches that "Oh, it's all these wicked guns that leap into hands and make people do terrible things." All these magic guns. Magic they must be, for it's the gun that's treated as the cause and not the wickedness in the heart of the one who uses them for evil. So it is that the "solution" is to prevent people from owning firearms and never once asking why someone thought it was proper to gun down their fellowman.

Here is the terrible truth: The cause behind these incidents is the spiritual condition of the heart of the one who does them. That being the case, someone so inclined will seek out any means of doing so. Not having one means does not preclude having another. The only thing that prevents that is to change the spiritual condition of the heart, and that is beyond the power of any man or woman or law. That can only come from God.

Odd that the one thing the Left doesn't want is a return to religious instruction in schools. Maybe I'm drawing a false correlation, but when we had such, these things didn't happen. But this, like prayer, isn't seen as a solution. You could put us all in prison-life hives where every aspect of our lives are regulated, and I guarantee someone would still shove a shive into someone's side, because none of that can change the heart.

Or perhaps the fear, deep down, is what God will do. The prayer "Your will be done" is a scary thing. When we invite God in, some things we might not want dealt with with be dealt with, if we're honest to Him.

Fervent said:

It speaks to the main issue, since being wrong about a belief would require it to actually not be the case that our belief is true. So recognizing the possibility that our beliefs are mistaken is different from believing we are wrong.

Click to expand...

Okay, I get what you're saying. The original question has morphed in meaning for me more than once which created some misunderstanding for me as pertains to the true intent of the question. As I recall, this was the final version:

2PhiloVoid said:
Let's make it simpler here: Does anyone on this forum hold a belief that they know is false?

This was my reply:
childeye 2 said:
You may as well ask me if I'm a mind reader. As far as I can see, your question proposes a scenario that is not possible, unless someone is lying to themselves.

Fervent said:

beliefs are not "possibilities", they are positions about the truth or falsity of a state of affairs. For them to be wrong, it must actually be the case that what we believe is false.

If it is unrealized, it's a possibility and not a fact. I'm not sure what you're on about with the rest of this paragraph.

Click to expand...

I think you're misunderstanding me so we may be saying the same thing in different ways.

Fervent said:

You haven't' proven it untrue, you've adopted one of the three prongs of the trilemma(dogmatic/axiomatic) and ran with it. You've stopped the questioning at something you think is self-evident rendering it immune to questioning.

Click to expand...

I never said I don't use axiomatic statements or premises as a basis to conduct semantic analysis. I did comment on why it was the only viable solution of the three. I don't know why you think a premise is immune to questioning. I certainly don't think so. I'm just establishing a workable coherent premise. You can question any axiomatic statements I've used or perhaps you may even see ways to improve upon them.

Fervent said:

It's not about definitions, it's an open problem in epistemics from a thought experiment about a man trying to lift himself and his horse out of the mud by pulling on his hair.

Click to expand...

I get that it's a problem in epistemics. Like I said, apart from "resorting to the circular reasoning" (a logical fallacy doesn't qualify as a solution), it's a true statement. What statement? Your statement in italics below.

childeye 2 said:

Fervent: We either accept something as true dogmatically, resort to circcular reasoning, or find ourselves facing an infinite regress of questions. <--- Childeye responds: Apart from the circular reasoning, this statement is true. Why? Because by definition, it's not possible to prove that that which is Eternal is actually Eternal.

Because by definition, ---> it's not possible to prove that that which is Eternal is actually Eternal. <--- So Fervent, do you understand that this is the reason why I see the question 'Why?' as infinitely regressive?


I know you're interested in the Munchhausen trilemma but try to consider that for me the issue began with overcoming confirmation bias, as well as responding to a query about how we can see our epistemic faults.

Fervent said:

I have no idea what you're on about with the first part of this,

Click to expand...

Fervent said:
I fail to see how our motives in assknig "why" would alter the productivity of the act. <--- I took this as an invite to show how motives in asking "why" would alter the productivity of the act.

Therefore, I pointed out how in the case of slander it's productive to question the slanderer as to Why he/she believes what he/she states., and alternatively, that we shouldn't question Why someone would show Grace to others because that would be unproductive.

If we don't question slander, it is wickedness. If we question slander, it is faithfulness.
Defending negative prejudice is cynicism, defending positive prejudice is grace.
Negative prejudice violates Love others as oneself, positive prejudice doesn't.

Fervent said:

and the second seems to miss the issue at hand. I'm not asserting an absolute, I'm recognizing a live problem in epistemics. Questioning everything means not taking anything as self-evident, because as soon as we assert something as self-evident we cannot question it.

Click to expand...

But you're resorting to a circular argument when you say we must question everything so as to not take anything as self-evident. And just because we assert something as self-evident doesn't mean we can't question it or rather check it. It's just there to establish something to reason upon.

To do subjective semantic analysis, one needs to examine the beginnings and predictable conclusions of contrary propositions using deductive and inductive reasoning so as to arrive at a truth value through comparison. Hence, we can check a claim of Truth similarly to checking one's addition by using subtraction, or in subjective analysis, similar to calculating longitude and latitude with the compass rose.

Fervent said:

The issue is, "facts" tend to more often be common agreements not to question them rather than indisputably true statements.

Click to expand...

Light allows us to see seems indisputable to me. It wouldn't matter if half the population of the world disagrees.

Fervent said:

Sure, but the key issue there is that we don't apprehend reality directly. We have senses that are interpreted. by our brains. For example, what we see is inverted and corrected by our brains rather than the raw image our eyes detect. And our perceptions are highly dependent on our beliefs and the language we use, for example speakers of languages with more words for different colors are able to perceive subtler variations of color than those with fewer color words. Reality isn't created in our imagination, but we do not apprehend it naively.

Click to expand...

We are part of reality, but I get your point.

Fervent said:

yeah, but you used two different sense of "meaning", one being carrying a definition and the other denoting purposeful

Click to expand...

Overall, a purposeful existence would experience something meaningful.

Fervent said:

How was it determined that it was reasonable to presume someone is innocent until proven guilty?

Click to expand...

Love others as I would want to be loved.

Fervent said:

To the first, you're conflating two distinct situations. Certainly, it would be foolish to question things immediately present to us. But if we're to question everything, we must entertain skeptical hypotheses such as the question of whether we were created in this very moment with false memories implanted in us. Or that what we "see" is a simulation and not reality. Or that the "person" we're conversing with on the internet is not in fact a person but is an AI chat bot. Claiming somehting is self-evident is simply taking skeptical inquiry off the table, and fails as a solution for Munchaussen's trilemma

Click to expand...

To fill in the blank with 'something' is true/false, is to have created a sound semantical structure so as to examine positives and negative directions in thought and thereby discover what is true/false, as well as establish well founded beliefs. It's more productive than just regressively asking why/why not, because deception is based on turning negatives into positives, positives into negatives, or making them appear the same so that no one can tell the difference. <---Is all this word salad to you?

Fervent said:

Those aren't axioms, that's a tautological statement. Which while trivially true tell us nothing about reality, only about what we mean by the words we use.

Click to expand...

Semantics are about the sentiments that words carry, insights into the human condition and reasons for behavior (which we experience in reality). When examining sentiments people express in a moral/immoral paradigm, a statement like "something is true/false" is referencing beliefs and unbelief that manifest things like despair, doublemindedness, faith, cynicism, grace, carnal vanity, and generally reveal positive and negative connotations, as well as objective and subjective perspectives. <--- If this is word salad to you, you can ask for clarity.

Fervent said:

Nope, there are no unversally recognized self evident truths because no one has proposed something that everyone agrees upon. Claiming something is self-evident isn't a solution to Munchaussen's trilemma, it's simply refusing to subject whatever is supposedly self-evident to skeptical inquiry.

Click to expand...

I'm not refusing to subject any premise I use to skeptical inquiry; I would welcome any possible improvements. I must ask, do you think it's possible to project bias onto others? And how is this below not circular reasoning?

There are no universally self-evident Truths because the Dogmatic solution is no solution.
The Dogmatic solution is no solution because there are no universally self-evident Truths.

Fervent said:

I'm not sure you understand what the word "axiom" means.

Click to expand...

See this statement: "No one can prove something is Eternal means we must either trust or distrust".

I know it's rough around the edges but in a quick subjective semantic analysis, I would guess some people will say it's a proposition designed to postulate that something/Someone is Eternal. While others will say it's the foundational self-evident Truth for the necessity of Faith.

axiom​

noun​

ax·i·om ˈak-sē-əm

Synonyms of axiom
1
: a statement accepted as true as the basis for argument or inference : postulate sense 1
one of the axioms of the theory of evolution


2
: an established rule or principle or a self-evident truth
cites the axiom "no one gives what he does not have"


3
: a maxim widely accepted on its intrinsic merit

I don't have much to say on this as I believe most Christians, if they are serious about Christ, experience this to some degree. The world has changed dramatically and it is getting late on the timeline.

But... I do want to encourage you with the encouragement God gives me, that we can look forward while we are here at the time soon coming where none of us will be lonely at all. Not only will we not be lonely, but we will have more friends than we can manage. The war is still raging, but we have good things on the way, better things than we can imagine.

Christ is our hope, and the best and only hope. Soon everything we know will change and our redemption will be complete, and life will never be the same as it is now again. I look forward to these things to keep my mind and heart aligned and to stay motivated. (Isaiah 26:3)

Praying for you.

224. Welcome him as he is





Let’s ask ourselves, “Who would be on the point of wanting to come back or go to church?” Let’s go slowly, invite him, but leave him free. Whether he says yes or no, we’ll welcome his answer. We’ll continue to welcome him as he is. Either we’ll continue to pray for him, or we’ll pray for another person, since he will have accepted.



One day a person says that he has no connection with God even though he’s doing good. The answer was simple: “Yet you do what Jesus asks of you to watch every day on your two parents who are living their last passage to eternity.” He understood. Children do what God asks for when they take care of their parents. Parents do what God asks for when they take care of their children too.



Then remains to celebrate what God offers us for free by living Mass, listening to the Word and receiving the Eucharist. Everything we receive from God is perfect. When we share the good, beautiful, real and true, it comes from God. Why not thank him by confessing our faults and receiving everything from him through the Eucharist and the Word?



Announce the Good News:

“Philip came to Azotus, and went about proclaiming the good news to all the towns until he reached Caesarea.” Acts, chapter 8, verse 40

He evangelizes.

A christian is someone who carries Jesus wherever he goes. All opportunities are good to witness, to know Jesus, to evangelize and to be in the mission.



Everywhere, in all places, we can pray for the people who are present, on the road, in the shops, in our meetings. The humble prayer of the heart is powerful.

Praying in our hearts for people we meet is very effective. And we leave it to Jesus to touch their hearts.



The new American Bible, 2011-2014

Book: Let’s evangelize, Normand Thomas

Ave, María, grátia plena,
Dóminus tecum.
Benedicta tu in muliéribus,
et benedíctus fructus ventris
tui, Iesus.
Sancta María, Mater Dei,
ora pro nobis peccatoribus
nunc et in hora mortis nostrae.
Amen.

boughtwithaprice said:

Friend, you are all in circles and held captive by false conclusions.

Click to expand...

No more confusing than your claims of not being sinless but your sin being better than the other guy's sin.

boughtwithaprice said:

Temptation is not sin.

Click to expand...

"Jesus said" evil comes from within via evil thoughts and defiles everyone. How many times does it have to be cited for your position to acknowledge it? You've probably been excusing it for so long you simply gloss over the facts. Mark 4:15, Mark 7:21-23 (and Matt. similar) among others such as all have, present tense have sin, and of course sin is of the devil, the TEMPTER, the wicked one. The essential personification of evil that works within mankind that Jesus showed us literally thousands of times in the Gospels.

boughtwithaprice said:

Paul tells us to not be conformed to the world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. How do we do this?

Click to expand...

First of all the world has no clue "all" the people in it are captured by the god of this world. Even Paul admitted to the presence of evil with him and that he did evil, after salvation. Even being the present tense "I am" chief of sinners. So why not start with being HONEST about these these things. Don't you realize the tempter works within? Don't you realize evil actually does come from within.

IF you claim exemption from that reality then you are actually none of His but just another bad actor.

boughtwithaprice said:

If you have proper catechism it’s easy. The example is adultery. The world says sex is for pleasure and we have a need to indulge. A Christian knows that adultery is sin, yet he will be overwhelmed if he gives into the world’s reasoning.

Click to expand...

And you merely mistake the act only for adultery. Any good Roman catholic (been there) knows that sin operates in "thought, word and deed." Deed only being the culmination of what was already within. The greater point in this conversation however remains, that sin is of the devil. IF we don't have a fulcrum to look to other than the person or ourselves then we are evil, perhaps even devils, and Jesus didn't come to save/convert devils.

The devil is deemed a necessary evil, done for a greater God that only God can derive. Not by you and your positions claim to adequate performances, which can't even start with simple honesty and perceptions beyond the external acts of sin which anyone, even an unbeliever can see and understand.

boughtwithaprice said:

To combat the sin of lust, we have the ability to reason, am I thinking of having a child in doing this? Will this action be fruitful and achieve God’s will? If the answer is is no, then the thoughts of sexual activity should be dismissed. They achieve no good and are a sin against the body.
You say that is too hard to do? Have you ever tried to imagine a crying child each time you are tempted by lust? Do you even value chastity or try to live by the world’s standards that sex is a need and one is no good unless having sex?

Click to expand...

I think you entire scheme on these subjects will never get to the heart of the issue at hand and seeks to excuse and hide the inner parts, with only a oh shucks, yeah, it happens but I'm still good. Bleech on all of that nonsense.

Here's what the real Bible tells us about our hearts: Jer. 17:9

The heart is deceptive above "all things' and desperately wicked.

I'd even say the heart is never so deceptive and wicked as when trying to claim it's not.

boughtwithaprice said:

Transform your mind and don’t give into the world, and you will see how easily you can be set free. Evil thoughts will come, but with a transformed mind, you would now have the power to dismiss them


The alternative is to not work on your mind,

Click to expand...

I'm not interested in transformation via lying hypocrisy, but thanks for the typical phony offer

The evil in no one will be getting off the hook, in Jesus' Name

J_B_ said:

As I worked through my engineering degrees, I often found myself using math & science I didn't really understand. As is often the case, no one wants to be the first to speak up and admit a weakness, but I suspect it is the same for many who work their way through the sciences. Having a philosophical nature, working that way created a cognitive dissonance I was very much aware of. The justification I settled on, was that if, at the end of the day, the machine worked, the means justified the end. Further, no machine is ever perfect (just as no person is ever perfect). So, if we're working to improve ourselves and the machine, that's the best we can do.

All of this is a preamble to my question, but feel free to comment on it if you like.

Over my decades-long career I've continued to knock down the things I don't understand one at a time. The latest hill to conquer was the Kalman Filter, which depends on the Cauchy Principal Value. Once the light bulb of understanding went off, my immediate reaction was, "Well, nuts." A common topic in the Philosophy of Science is the meaning of the correlation between mathematics and reality. In this case, there is none. The Cauchy Principal Value is something we can pretty easily say is not real (though I'm sure someone is going to disagree with that). The math is valid - I don't question that - but it has no correlation to anything in reality. All it does is help us make a better guess.

It's part of being an engineer that you are constantly making estimates (guesses). So, knowing a Kalman Filter is based on a guess of a function's value rather than the function itself isn't going to slow down engineering. But what about science? Of course people work on improvements to the Kalman Filter, but I don't see any signs that the goal is to find the "real" value. It's more just to make a better guess.

Finally, the question. If it were known (e.g. widely accepted) that a scientific model isn't real, but merely our best guess, should we continue to build on that, pushing the extrapolation farther and farther? Or should our efforts be focused on a better model of reality? In other words, engineering is essentially saying, "As long as machine performance continues to improve, it's not worth the cost, even though we know our model isn't based on reality." Is it OK for science to also adopt that attitude?

Click to expand...

Any model is by definition an approximation of reality. For example a sample from a population can be used to model that population but until you use then entire population you’ll never have 100 confidence.

But a model is something more manageable than reality and if the predictions a model makes are accurate we can say the model is accurate to a specified level of accuracy.

That’s why science is tentative. We will never have 100% of the information in the system because that only exists as the system.

We just have to live with that.