Proclamations and assertions as facts

I think it’s important to provide evidence for any proclamation

In fact, for teaching or talking, the proclamation is likely a liability in itself

The proclamation can never be laid to rest until every last shred of evidence is examined… Which can never happen in the lifetime of the claim maker

Maybe an examination of proclamations is in order

But what about things you don’t need evidence for? By example if we say “torturing animals is stupid” do you need to prove with psychological tests that the person who tortured the animal was stupid?

The whole issue dissolves if we say, “I think torturing animals is stupid” … if scientists and teachers would they, “We think there was a big bang event…”, I’d have no issue with that. Any unproven assertion stated as fact gnaws at me and is, rightly, open for ridicule.

It also takes up time: debating the statement instead of testing the idea.

I don’t belief in constants… like for the speed of light or gravity… nor do I hold with constants in the deduction of human troubles; money is the root of all evil, or, all troubles are caused by failure to examine the thinking process.

Replace all with lots, or even most or many, and again, the issue dissolves and people are free to start a debate with the issue instead of the statement