Replying to LO30904 --
Hi Hal and All
Hal wrote...
>Please read your own words "Accepting things as facts . . ." - no I'm
>talking about FACTS the facts themselves, not some nebulous
>"acceptance".
I don't think you can separate a fact from it's acceptance (but I
could be wrong). There is something very "social" about how we accept
facts.
Dare I say "...a fact does not become a fact until it has been
accepted as one, and even this acceptance can be later revoked". This
acceptance may be by one person or a number of people, thre rebuke by
one or many.
What then makes a fact "true"? The fact itself or the acceptance of
the fact?
Hal also wrote...
>Is it your implication that one cannot accept facts as facts?
I don't know anymore! What may be a fact to one person, may not be a
fact to another. Recently we have been asked to accept as "fact" that
Saddam Hussain had, and was still developing "weapons of mass
destruction" and action needed to be taken. It now seems the
politicians who were telling us these (secret) facts are going back to
review them! I suppose when it comes down to it one must be able to
accept facts to get the job done. BUT I would add the question "should
this acceptance of the facts be absolute?", and I think on that point
I would answer - no.
I hope this goes some way to give an impression of my current position
on this. But this position may change in the light of new facts. I
suspect though, that I may hold a very odd view of this topic! and
that I may also be misinterpreting what Hal means.
Best regards
Philip Keogh
Pathology Information Officer
(see our website at www.leedsteachinghospitals.com)
--"Philip Keogh" <Philip.Keogh@leedsth.nhs.uk>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.