Now, why would a proponent alter the commonly accepted meaning of words? Well....one does so to sway an argument in the direction the speaker wishes it to go.
Problem is....it is dishonest, and false.
And...those who do so should be judged to have lost the argument.
"Intellectually Honest and Intellectually Dishonest Debate Tactics
1. Redefining words: debater uses a word that helps him, but that does not apply, by redefining it to suit his purposes, like leftists calling government spending “investment” Intellectually honest and intellectually dishonest debate tactics
Here, an example of the words in question:
Theory: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge ;a conjecture.
Fact: Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed
I believe that these are the commonly accepted meanings of the two terms....
To my mind, these two terms are not synonymous
1. Although every reference I've seen referred to "the theory of evolution," the most popular writer on the subject, Stephen J. Gould, pushed it way over toward "proven."
Gould: " Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"....."
http://courses.washington.edu/anth599/Evolution as Fact and Theory Gould 1981.pdf
2. Wow. Our pal, Dr. Gould, paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, as well as atheistic Marxist, seems willing to bend definitions to his desire when it comes to either religion or evolution.
a.fact: ' something that actually exists; reality; truth:
'Your fears have no basis in fact.'
something known to exist or to have happened
Fact Define Fact at Dictionary.com
b. something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence; a true piece of information
Fact - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
But, shouldn't we wait for proof before we award the idea with the term 'fact'?
Especially in science.
3." Something demonstrated to exist ...."
And on that basis, of course, evolution is not a fact.
"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.
But let's cut Gould some slack...after all, it's only been a century and a half, with more scientists working today than all previous scientists who ever lived, combined....
Proof of Darwin's view will be found any day now.....any day....
Problem is....it is dishonest, and false.
And...those who do so should be judged to have lost the argument.
"Intellectually Honest and Intellectually Dishonest Debate Tactics
1. Redefining words: debater uses a word that helps him, but that does not apply, by redefining it to suit his purposes, like leftists calling government spending “investment” Intellectually honest and intellectually dishonest debate tactics
Here, an example of the words in question:
Theory: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge ;a conjecture.
Fact: Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed
I believe that these are the commonly accepted meanings of the two terms....
To my mind, these two terms are not synonymous
1. Although every reference I've seen referred to "the theory of evolution," the most popular writer on the subject, Stephen J. Gould, pushed it way over toward "proven."
Gould: " Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"....."
http://courses.washington.edu/anth599/Evolution as Fact and Theory Gould 1981.pdf
2. Wow. Our pal, Dr. Gould, paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, as well as atheistic Marxist, seems willing to bend definitions to his desire when it comes to either religion or evolution.
a.fact: ' something that actually exists; reality; truth:
'Your fears have no basis in fact.'
something known to exist or to have happened
Fact Define Fact at Dictionary.com
b. something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence; a true piece of information
Fact - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
But, shouldn't we wait for proof before we award the idea with the term 'fact'?
Especially in science.
3." Something demonstrated to exist ...."
And on that basis, of course, evolution is not a fact.
"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.
But let's cut Gould some slack...after all, it's only been a century and a half, with more scientists working today than all previous scientists who ever lived, combined....
Proof of Darwin's view will be found any day now.....any day....
