FBI on Einstein

[JKSCHW at aol.com]

Basically, yeah, a theoretical fact is a fact that we accept because it is a part of a theory that we have reason to accept for some complex of reasons. The labor theory of value, if it is a fact at all, is a theoretical fact, since value is wholly a theoretical quantity whose effects are discerned only indirectly. Most philosophers of science will agree that any theory/observation distinction is only relative and provisional, but we can make out a difference between watching stock prices rise and fall and the mysterious movements of the law of value operating behind our backs. 

I am always glad to excite my sweetie kelly by talking analytical philosophy, like John Cleese did talking Russian in A Fish Named Wanda. We APs are sooo rigorous.  XXX --jks

In a message dated Wed, 6 Sep 2000  3:08:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kelley <kwalker2 at gte.net> writes:

<< At 02:43 PM 9/6/00 -0400, JKSCHW at aol.com wrote:
>Empirical facts are those known through experience, as opposed to a priori 
>facts like 2+2=4, known in some other way. There may also be a contrast 
>with a theoretical fact, a fact derived from the structure of a theory. If 
>that is a valid contrast, the constant velocity of c is a theoretical 
>rather than a merely empirical fact. --jks

oooooo oooooo, i never did get me enough of analytical phil.  continental 
kinda gal myself.  did dally a bit with the heterodox blasphemers who 
thought they could do both.  but ahem...well.... as my american systematic 
metaphyiscs prof told me, the analytical phil folks think that both us and 
continental phil are uhhhhhh not really especially rigorous.

so, can you give me a better example of this distinction.  what exactly is 
a theoretical fact?  if it can be observed/known through experience then it 
is something that we know is because a theory tells us so? is that it?

k

 >>