yetiftw

not within your lifetime though. you just have to have faith in the peer review process. also peer reviewing typically does not involve actually reproducing the results

nuance won't hurt you I promise

but you can't! are you personally able to verify the results of every scientific investigation ever performed? think about what's currently happening in psychology. loads of old foundational studies have been found to be irreproducible. and yet people had faith that they were conducted honestly and appropriately

that's not true. there are things that are not definitions. like my bed for instance, there are aspects that are arbitrary (my personal preferences, design choices, etc) and aspects that are not arbitrary (its physical form that exists beyond definition)

yes but you still have to have faith in the ability of another person to do science and not falsify evidence

but to people with faith, their faith is evidence-based

yes but translation from evidence to what caused the evidence to exist requires assumptions, like the fact that trig works. I'm not saying assumptions are bad, just that they should be acknowledged

maybe you're the one who doesn't understand the ramifications of its meaning

literally every definition ever is arbitrary

they were complaining about things that are only unpleasant because of their own feelings toward the situation

can you elaborate? I'm not sure what your point is

yeah except that logic relies on base assumptions, which are ultimately chosen based on gut feelings