Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker5  Is Steve trying to prove in this thread that there's no need for proof?  |
Everyone is stating how things are from their own perspectives and everyone is "correct" from within their points of reference. Each perspective is proof onto itself. Each perspective is self-reinforcing. Each perspective persists until the person experiences something that doesn't fit his perspective and he either rejects it or changes his perspective to include the anomaly (which is no longer an anomaly).
Steve is trying to inject anomalies into others' perspectives in the hopes that they'll assimilate it and grow so that they can experience more..
Incidentally, this is what science does too.. that is, explain what is being observed. Everything goes well until someone experiences something that doesn't quite fit the current model. Others investigate whether they experience the same thing or not. If enough many scientists experience it, they turn the new experience into a new model which usually envelopes the previous one... unless of course the previous one is so incorrect that it has to be abandoned.. Usually, it turns out that the previous model is a subset, a special case of the new model (Ex: Newton's laws of motion and relativistic motion).