Much of the information that people assume is ‘factual’ actually turns out to be inaccurate. Thus， any piece of information referred to as a ‘fact’ should be mistrusted since it may well be proven false in the future.
Should we be doubtful to all the information at hands because the rightness of which is uncertain? The speaker claims so， I concede that people often commit various fallacies in the course of cognizing things， however I fundamentally take exception of the arguer‘s assertion to mistrust every fact we might encounter. And I will substantially discuss my views thereinafter.
To begin with， the speaker seems to implicate that a fact would be proven false in the future under numerous circumstance. Nevertheless I prefer to arguer that facts never change. No matter how did the Medieval Church and Inquisition persecute Bruno， the fact never changes that the earth is far from being the center of the universe as the religious sovereigns had assumed or hoped for， while just a minor particle in it. Equally， no matter how Edison had tried to incite the public fear and distrust to the alternative current electricity， the fact never changes that Teals’ electrical system is vastly superior to his direct current electrical one， and would be accepted and applied in larger range.
However， what do change are the human‘s objective interpretations to facts. One compelling argument to this point is that， due to the limitation of human’s knowledge and comprehensive capability， they tend to make insufficient or even false understanding to the certain fact. An apt illustration is the changes of cognition to disease. While at the ancient time， our progenitors believed the a man becoming a patient for the reason that he had conduct crimes or offended some ghosts or spirits，the contemporary people have well know that the varies of pathogens are the basic causes to our diseases， and the defects of our immune system and so forth are also the factors as well. Another argument for the change of comprehension to fact is that different people always observe and interpret from different perspectives. Though the Relativity theory is not well compliable with the Quantum mechanism， no one call the greatness of both Einstein and Bohr， because their theories are based on distinct views， the former from the macrocosm and the later from the microcosm.
Notwithstanding the foregoing reasons for that human tend to make fallacies during the cause of comprehending and cognizing facts， these reasons should never be the excuses to doubt every conclusion we might draw from facts. Based on certain rational inference and proper knowledge fundament， the conclusions we make might well be justifiable， if not completely right， to certain degree. What we need to do is to promote the enterprise of pursuing the better answer and try to use the result we have get to application， instead of wasting our time to undue doubt and suspicion. Though the medical scientists have not fully understood the mechanism of how the does the implanted organ interact with the wounded body， they are not refrain from using the implanting skill to save patients， of course the precondition or which is that this technology is much well established than the fundamental theory.
To sum up， while I advocate the speaker‘s opinion that it is inevitable for human to comprehend facts inaccurately， for the reason of the limitation of the abilities， I essentially disagree with his assertion that facts will continually alter themselves， as well as his recommendation to discredit any piece of fact. In the final analysis， I would arguer once more that facts never change and although the misunderstanding to them is inevitable， we should not defer ourselves from the pursuit to fully comprehending them.