Exploring the Concept of Being Wrong: The Complexity of Perception and Reality

[christian_dude_27]

is it wrong? are you wrong? are they wrong? who is wrong? are we all wrong? technicly, to a point, we are all wrong. no one on this planet is the one who created the universe, no one here can really say how it was done. all we can do is observe what has already been done. in the past and in the future. so very well anything you say or do could all be wrong. for all you know, you could really not even be here and the matrix could be real. for all you know, we are going through constant wormholes meeting different realities everyday and never notice the change, because we are all wrong.

 

[ram2048]

if we are wrong and we have no control over it, then who cares?

as long as we strive to find what is right, we are human. and we are gods

[edit]: OMG teh spellingz

 

[Antonio Lao]

It is the belief in what is right that keep me going. Without this personal belief, life will be boring living in an absolute certainty that everything is wrong no matter what one does or says. A life based on fear of absolute certainty of wrongfulness is not worth living.

The search for scientific truth is not the same as the search for a creator of the universe although complete understanding of scientific truth can lead one to a clearer concept of a creator. Many great thinkers have passed their lives without even bother to understand the true nature of this creator. Yet their great achievements have help succeeding generations for better living and understanding. The search for scientific truth goes on.

Einstein said: 'Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.'

 

[christian_dude_27]

well, it kinda doesn't matter if it keeps you going or not, not to be rude or anything, but we are all wrong and we should accept that. even though we know we're wrong, that doesn't mean we can say our belifs of what COULD be right. it never stopped me.

 

[baffledMatt]

In physics you can only ever disprove a theory, so even if we were correct we would never be able to prove it.

 

[Antonio Lao]

christian dude 27,

...but we are all wrong and we should accept that.

I hope I am understanding you correctly? You are saying that we are wrong in what ever we do or say? Not what we think? Because there is no way for you to know what I think.

And the question of right and wrong is more pertinent to morality and ethical values than to the search of scientific truth, which is the main goal of this forum.

To say that we are all wrong is the same as saying the ethical value of what we do or say is zero. This null value makes all our actions and endeavors meaningless and hence life with zero value is not worth living for. I think, this is the way terrorists think that each life has no value and only the self-imposed fanatical belief has infinite value. To me, this is not acceptable now or ever.

 

[geistkiesel]

to the christian hypocrite dude.

well, it kinda doesn't matter if it keeps you going or not, not to be rude or anything, but we are all wrong and we should accept that. even though we know we're wrong, that doesn't mean we can say our belifs of what COULD be right. it never stopped me.

]

I have a problem with some that make univesal statements like, ". . .we are all wrong.. . ." Bull****, that is all you have to offer, that and the fact that you don't like to edit your posts. What is it about you and knowledge, maybe just a simple case of mental sloth?

Have you read matthew 6:1-4 yet? Your christian master has you identified as a hypocrite. Got it, yet? Will you ever get it? Don't struggle for an answer, here's a freebie: No.

 

[christian_dude_27]

well, you all have good reasons and points, both for that matter. but still, as baffledmatt up there said, "In physics you can only ever disprove a theory, so even if we were correct we would never be able to prove it." live off of that. you may very well be correct, but it's best not to make yourself look good by saying you are. to say that you are wrong gives you more of a feeling that you should work to be right, work harder to get the right answer, and not sit tehre and say, "oh, well, I'm right, guess there is no reason for studying this subject anymore." nothing ever ends there, nothing is ever "done". there is so much more to this universe, and to say you ahv figured it out would be what i call a hypocryte. you can call me what you like, but i and god alone are the only one's who know what i really am. and i don't have a christian master. he's a father, a caring loving fther, not a decieving master, i would suggest religion not be brought into this conversation, ok?

 

[Antonio Lao]

Scientific knowledge is based on rational thoughts. Reasons are derived from actual experiences (past and present). To be a judge of knowledge requires having the knowledge beforehand. Nobody can judge out of ignorance of the facts. And ignorant of the laws is not an excuse for pleading innocence in any court of justice. It is the responsiblity of all citizen of a country to know and understand its laws. It is the responsiblity of all scientists to know and understand all physical laws that have been accepted by the scientific community.

 

[christian_dude_27]

ok, look, all i was really saying was that we all have a great possibility of being wrong at everything we do, no matter what past or present say. we are just as right as we may be just as wrong, do you get it now?

 

[Antonio Lao]

I have made a lot of personal mistakes in my life. I should have done this or I should have done that. But life goes on. I never have the luxury of stopping and try to analyze what I should have done or why it's wrong or what are the possibilities of doing the best thing. If I have to stop and try to analyze every action I going to take then I could never pass the next second of time.

But in the search for scientific truth, it is correct to use rational thinking and analyze every hypothesis and idea. Each hypothesis or idea does not start by being right or wrong, it is neutral. There is no prejudgement. But further analyses and experimentations will eventually show the validity of the hypothesis or idea.

 

[christian_dude_27]

true, very true. you my friend think wise indeed. you are the first to answer the question correctly. neutral is the way to go, to be right, or to be wrong, always leaves a self rightous thought in our minds. but to be nuetral means that we know this, we know that the possibilites of us being right are just as great as us being wrong.

 

[Antonio Lao]

I am going to try one more time to explain my method of a scientific process from thought to action.

A scientific process must be a deterministic process. It cannot be associated by a probability. There is no doubt hidden in the process. There is no half-way logic in it like half-right or half-wrong. It is all or nothing. If there is doubt then the subsequent action is a gamble. it is just like playing with chance, just like gambling in the casinos.
The way to eliminate all the doubts from a course of action for a scientific process is by the use of reasons, rational thinking.

Nobody in their right mind will intentionally do something they know for certain is wrong. Nobody in their wrong mind will intentionally do something they know for certain is right. The result is no action.

A scientific thought is very similar to faith in a religious belief. The only difference is that a religious belief does not require rational thinking. The miracles in the Bible are just that, miracles. They cannot truly be subjected to rationalization by modern science. They are accepted by faith in the divine action. And it is not correct for any believer to harbor any doubt about these divine actions for their justifications.

In quantum mechanics, there are stochastic processes which by their very nature are all probabilistic and can only be determined by the use of statistical methods. But the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle shows that the uncertainty lays in only one or the other of the conjugate variables but the product of both is a certainty (100%) that is always greater or equal Planck's constant of action.

 

[christian_dude_27]

but that does not mean that whatever your "observations" were are absolutely correct. remember, as i said before, one observation in the future could make all of your observations now completely false. remember, before certain observations were amde, peopel thought that the world was flat, and they had "proof" that it was.

 

[Warr]

we are all wrong and we should accept that.

If I wanted to be a mindless drone. That statement is just saddening.

 

[hello3719]

Those observations that you are talking about and that may end up false in the future are called "theories". A theory is not a 100 percent truth since IT DIDN"T PASS a complete rationnal thought process. And no , the people may have thought in the past that the Earth was flat, BUT they DIDN"t prove it(evidences are not a proof).

This is like saying every odd number is prime. The first odd numbers SEEM to be all prime numbers (this is an evidence) but we cannot be certain that it is true for all odd numbers without using rationnal thinking with the definition of prime numbers and odd numbers(the construction of the proof).