How is it impossible to prove I'm a scientist?

[EternalForest]

1:55:55

Skip to the above timestamp where he goes through the limitations of proof to see what I'm talking about ^

I was actually on-board and following perfectly until the "you can't prove you're a scientist" analogy came up. It doesn't make sense to me and I'll tell you why: If someone told me, "Prove that you're a musician", I could easily do that by sitting down at the piano in front of them and playing a full piece. And even though music is subjective, 99.9% of people would acknowledge that yes, he knows how to play the piano. Similarly, if I asked someone to prove they're a scientist, I could ask them to show me their degree, explain and define various scientific concepts, show videos of them working in the lab, show their note books, references from other scientists, reading their name in publications, etc. Now, proving to yourself that you exist is a bit harder, and maybe I'm taking the example too literally, but in a practical sense, yes, you can prove these basic things. 

It's more than just a memory if I can perform music in front of you.

It's more than just a memory if my name is published in a scientific journal.

Edited Friday at 05:06 AM by EternalForest

[aurum]

18 minutes ago, EternalForest said:

1:55:55

Skip to the above timestamp where he goes through the limitations of proof to see what I'm talking about ^I was actually on-board and following perfectly until the "you can't prove you're a scientist" analogy came up. It doesn't make sense to me and I'll tell you why: If someone told me, "Prove that you're a musician", I could easily do that by sitting down at the piano in front of them and playing a full piece. And even though music is subjective, 99.9% of people would acknowledge that yes, he knows how to play the piano. Similarly, if I asked someone to prove they're a scientist, I could ask them to show me their degree, explain and define various scientific concepts, show videos of them working in the lab, show their note books, references from other scientists, reading their name in publications, etc.

No, none of that proves anything other than experience exists. It would not prove their existence as a scientist or musician.

How do you know they aren't deceiving you?

How do you even know what science is without going into your memory?

18 minutes ago, EternalForest said:

Now, proving to yourself that you exist is a bit harder, and maybe I'm taking the example too literally, but in a practical sense, yes, you can prove these basic things. 

"Practicality" here is a trap.

We are not interested in practical here, we are interested in truth.

Is it absolutely true or not?

[ChrisZoZo]

6 hours ago, aurum said:

We are not interested in practical here, we are interested in truth.

Is it absolutely true or not?

There is no absolute truths here this is only relative truths.

[aurum]

3 hours ago, ChrisZoZo said:

There is no absolute truths here this is only relative truths.

It does not even prove it as a relative truth.

[ChrisZoZo]

@aurum yep.
 

sorry I see now that you’re just saying as effect.

Edited Friday at 04:57 PM by ChrisZoZo

[Yimpa]

“Sit down and contemplate it for even 10 minutes, you’ll realize what I’m saying is correct.”

9:30 clip + 30 second ad 

Edited Friday at 05:04 PM by Yimpa