Can Science Prove Anything? (virtual, experience)

[Sunstone]

Can science prove anything? If so, what and why? If not, why not?

Bonus question: Can your doctor prove the pain in your arm is caused by a broken bone?

[yossarian22]

Under any useful definition of proof, yes. Science proves lots of things.
To the second bit, yes.
The doctor breaks your other arm. Is the pain the same? If yes, then your other arm is broken. Still not convinced? The doctor can continue adding fractures to your arm to convince you.

[djrez4]

Originally Posted by yossarian22

Under any useful definition of proof, yes. Science proves lots of things.

Science says it cannot prove anything to be true. It can only prove things to be false. Even with the most concrete, observed, experimental evidence and solid, theoretical calculation, there always exists the possibility that a theory can be falsified.

To the second bit, yes.
The doctor breaks your other arm. Is the pain the same? If yes, then your other arm is broken. Still not convinced? The doctor can continue adding fractures to your arm to convince you.

And what is pain, but a condition of the mind? If the doctor alters the mind-state, whether through medication or not, and can diminish or remove the pain without touching the arm, was the arm causing the pain in the first place?

[tomspug]

I really hate the Brain in the Vat. Thanks, Wachowski Brothers, for popularizing it.

[yossarian22]

Originally Posted by djrez4

Science says it cannot prove anything to be true.

Hence the 'reasonable' I stuck on. If we view 100,000,000,000,000,000 turtles, and all are green, is it unreasonable to say 'turtles are green'?
If you insist on being absolutely obtuse and sticking to a defintion of proof which only exists in the world of mathematics, well, that's another story. It is pointless to have a defintion with virtually no real world use.
Would you prefer, proved true to a reasonable degree?

If the doctor alters the mind-state, whether through medication or not, and can diminish or remove the pain without touching the arm, was the arm causing the pain in the first place?

Well, that's irrelevant. You are adding more conditions to the story.

[Somkid]

I'll try to make my answer brief for now and I'll be happy to give more detail later if you like.

Science can prove many things via the scientific method which is our best scale to see how things hold up consistently.

Well I guess it goes without saying that a doctor can determine your arm is broken with an examination, should the doctor push, pull and prod you will experience a great deal of pain. After the arm is set and immobilized the pain resides, in about 6-8 weeks the pain is gone.

[djrez4]

Originally Posted by yossarian22

Hence the 'reasonable' I stuck on. If we view 100,000,000,000,000,000 turtles, and all are green, is it unreasonable to say 'turtles are green'?
If you insist on being absolutely obtuse and sticking to a defintion of proof which only exists in the world of mathematics, well, that's another story. It is pointless to have a defintion with virtually no real world use.
Would you prefer, proved true to a reasonable degree?

Do not underestimate my obtuseness! You asked if science can ever prove anything. I think you answered your own question.

Well, that's irrelevant. You are adding more conditions to the story.

I'm adding conditions to test the source of the pain. Is the pain the result of the broken arm? Or is it the result of a neuron firing in the brain? I see no need to get all huffy when someone adds to the discussion.

(From experience, add enough morphine to the equation and a broken arm ceases to hurt and begins to feel "interesting.")

[UltraViolet]

Given all the key conditions of a repeated experiment remain the same,
science can demonstrate "trends".
Given that the key "conditions" of that repeated experiment
WILL NEVER ALTER, you might then elevate the trend to "law".

I however am not one given to the notion that major reality conditions will not alter.
So AT BEST, science for me, might "proove" a "trend" under given conditions.

Science, to my knowledge, does not usually incorporate more "esoteric" test factors in with it's experementing.
Thus it doesn't generally interest me much on a PERSONAL level.
Also, things that I CANNOT UNDERSTAND (or self evidence), prove absolutely nothing to me.

[rajakrsna]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

Can science prove anything? If so, what and why? If not, why not?

Bonus question: Can your doctor prove the pain in your arm is caused by a broken bone?

If you think the pain in the arm is due to a broken bone, then have that extremity x-rayed. Clinically, you can also diagnose a broken bone by asking the history of its appearance. You can also look for any swelling, limitation of movement & deformity in that arm. It doesn`t take science to do that just plain common sense.