The Logic Of Surak: Proofs, Axioms, and Theories
To start, there are three words that we need to accurately define: provable, axiomatic, and theoretical.
Provable means, "the result(s) can be consistently replicated".
Axiomatic means, "a proposition that is not capable of being proven nor disproven; its truth is (widely) assumed or believed to be self-evident".
Theoretical means, "a proposition or hypothesis that may be capable of being proven or disproven, but has not been proven nor disproven at this time".
Here's an example of these three terms in action.
Copernicus first posited that the earth revolves around the sun. This was unable to be proven, so it was an axiom.
Almost 200 years later, Galileo reasserted Copernicus' axiom. The church "authorities" at that time became enraged, as they interpreted the bible literally: Psalm 104:5 says, "[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Galileo was forced to prove Copernicus' axiom, and was further ordered to stand trial for heresy in 1633, wherein he was jailed and died under house arrest. It was not until 1609 when Johannes Kepler published his Three Laws of Planetary Motion that Copernicus' heliocentric axiom could be proven.2
Later on, Galileo developed the theory that the earth revolved around the sun. He then developed the technology that he used to prove this theory. So the axiom of Copernicus was proven false, and the theory of Galileo was proven true.
Believe what you want, but remember, it's an axiom at best until proven to be true or false.
At the end of this document, I have listed a series of examples that address various combinations of The Logic Of Surak. It is my hope that these will be useful in helping people solve their issues and being happier and more productive and all that positive energy stuff.
Footnote(s)
2 Of course, the "authorities" of that time demanded that Galileo "validate" their allegation that the Sun (and everything else) revolves around the Earth in order to increase their self-importance. Since the technology to prove or disprove that (or even to discover that "data") hadn't been invented when they made that assertion, they were guessing at best. This is what sometimes happens when belief-system "Literalists" (Fundamentalists) clash with science - rather than admit that a literal interpretation of their belief system books is unprovable and falls flat in the face of science, they instead try to impose their unprovable, axiomatic-at-best dogma using violence or non-Just law(s).
Backup to the footnote reference.
Provable means, "the result(s) can be consistently replicated".
Axiomatic means, "a proposition that is not capable of being proven nor disproven; its truth is (widely) assumed or believed to be self-evident".
Theoretical means, "a proposition or hypothesis that may be capable of being proven or disproven, but has not been proven nor disproven at this time".
Here's an example of these three terms in action.
Copernicus first posited that the earth revolves around the sun. This was unable to be proven, so it was an axiom.
Almost 200 years later, Galileo reasserted Copernicus' axiom. The church "authorities" at that time became enraged, as they interpreted the bible literally: Psalm 104:5 says, "[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Galileo was forced to prove Copernicus' axiom, and was further ordered to stand trial for heresy in 1633, wherein he was jailed and died under house arrest. It was not until 1609 when Johannes Kepler published his Three Laws of Planetary Motion that Copernicus' heliocentric axiom could be proven.2
Later on, Galileo developed the theory that the earth revolved around the sun. He then developed the technology that he used to prove this theory. So the axiom of Copernicus was proven false, and the theory of Galileo was proven true.
Believe what you want, but remember, it's an axiom at best until proven to be true or false.
At the end of this document, I have listed a series of examples that address various combinations of The Logic Of Surak. It is my hope that these will be useful in helping people solve their issues and being happier and more productive and all that positive energy stuff.
Footnote(s)
2 Of course, the "authorities" of that time demanded that Galileo "validate" their allegation that the Sun (and everything else) revolves around the Earth in order to increase their self-importance. Since the technology to prove or disprove that (or even to discover that "data") hadn't been invented when they made that assertion, they were guessing at best. This is what sometimes happens when belief-system "Literalists" (Fundamentalists) clash with science - rather than admit that a literal interpretation of their belief system books is unprovable and falls flat in the face of science, they instead try to impose their unprovable, axiomatic-at-best dogma using violence or non-Just law(s).
Backup to the footnote reference.