[AntonioLao]

A particular Aristotelian argument which wasn’t based on experimentations stated that a 10-pound solid metal ball falls faster than a 5-pounder. This was never disputed for close to 2000 years until the time of Galileo Galilei. The turning point was the supposedly and popularly talked about fanfare at the leaning tower of Pisa which more than likely never took place. Nevertheless, Galileo performed and recorded over 100 inclined plane experiments showed clearly without the shadow of a doubt that the above-mentioned Aristotelian argument is false. His concrete visual demos were the beginning of empirical science in general and experimental physics in particular. His documented information disguised as a discourse similar to a play and written in different languages and dialects but were based on factual observations were never accepted by the religious authorities believing in Aristotelian science and geocentric universe. Dogmatism suppressed and changed Galileo’s personal fate but it could not stopped the accelerated progress of empirical science. The final nails that sealed Galileo’s coffin for good were his telescopic detections of the motion of 4 Jovian satellites, the phases of Venus toppling the equally held Ptolemaic system of epicycles and the Earth as the center of the universe. These once again proved that the Copernican system of heliocentricity fell into acceptance faster than it would have been without the supports of astronomical facts. As the saying goes: ‘cold hard fact sinks, hot air rises’.

[Guille]

I believe we have far more thoughts than feelings. But the size of each feeling is avaragelly much higher than the size of each thought, so this is why they go up, on top. Every critical moment is the feeling's role. In fact all the decisions we make are by feelings, never by thought.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE In fact all the decisions we make are by feelings, never by thought.

Are you implying that decisions are based on feeling not facts?

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao Are you implying that decisions are based on feeling not facts?

Yes and no (everytime you ask me a philosophical question, yes and no).

YES:
We always analize the situations, the pros and cons, x, y, z factors, believability... But the decision is not taken by this, nor by dialectics nor by critique, it's taken by feeling, intuition, instinct.

NO:
These feelings are always conected to our thought, to our factual interpretation, and vice versa. Most people have an avarage 'feelings affect thoughts and thoughts affect feelings'. Some have very little interaffection. Some have a lot (like me). My philosophy that we live just to die makes me feel depressed for the whole of winter, but my feeling of love to someone special make me develop the idea of the positive movement in the beings. So the decision of the feelings could be very affected by the thoughts, but could not. Just like the analyze of the possibilities made by thoughts could be very affected by the feelings, but could not.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE to our factual interpretation

I could never interprete mathematical fact or experimental fact.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao I could never interprete mathematical fact or experimental fact.

What do you mean? Haven't you ever seen 2+2=4 and interpret that a quantity of 2 of something is added to a quantity of 2 of another thing and then you get a total quantity of 4 of 'something and another thing' (which is the set of the quantity of something and the quantity of another thing)?

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE What do you mean?

I took mathematical facts and experimental facts by a leap of faith without doubt or further intepretations. My meaning of the word 'interpretation' is similar to what is done by an interpreter, say, between Spanish and English. Math is a universal language of science. You either understand it or you don't, just like knowing or not knowing a valid proof.