knowledge=memory of nature
Debate Rounds (3)
And what about scientific knowledge, or mathematical knowledge? Those qualify as understandings of nature, not memories of nature. With scientific knowledge, I can predict things about nature that I've never seen happen before, so scientific knowledge can't just be memory of nature. You can't remember something that hasn't happened yet.
Overall, knowledge can't just be "memory of nature."
truth can only be in the past, predictions are unknown
Your first sentence says, "all memory you have where nature is involved, is knowledge." This is false. There are plenty of false memories, as is demonstrated by everyday experience and numerous scientific experiments. Three out of four false convictions result from eyewitness identifications on the stand.
Here is a source about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony:
"Eyewitness misidentification is widely recognized as the leading cause of wrongful conviction in the United States, accounting for more wrongful convictions than all other causes combined.1 Since 1989, DNA evidence has been used to exonerate nearly 200 individuals who were wrongfully convicted. Of those, approximately 75 percent were convicted on evidence that included inaccurate and faulty eyewitness identifications. In some cases, these innocent individuals were misidentified by more than one eyewitness."
Further, even if you were right about this, it isn't sufficient to demonstrate that knowledge is identical to memory of nature, which was the resolution being debated. It would only demonstrate that all memories of nature are knowledge, not that all knowledge consists of memories of nature. There could still be other types of knowledge, like direct perception (a case you have not addressed) and prediction.
Your second sentence says "truth can only be in the past, predictions are unknown." This is also false. If I hold a brick above the ground, I know beyond any reasonable doubt that it will fall if I drop it. That's not only common sense, it's attested to by all of physics. Predictions are capable of being known beyond a reasonable doubt, if they are based on a proven and tested scientific theory.
In conclusion, I think I have rebutted all of my opponent's claims, and used reputable sources in doing so. Vote Con.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.