At a current conference on whether physics can provide valuable and authentic knowledge of the world, two people sit and listen attentively. Both people think deeply about their own theories on the subject. One of them, David Hume, shakes his head in categorical denial. While most conference participants agree that physics can indeed provide real knowledge, he argues that physics and mathematics provide nothing at all. In fact, he reasoned, only things that can be divided into various sense impressions provide true knowledge and, since mathematics and science cannot (not least because they rely on causal relationships), they are basically a waste of time. Immanuel Kant. At certain points during the conference, he nods in agreement; but in others he casts a questioning, almost uncertain look and shakes his head gently to the side. Many conference attendees neglect to discuss the topic of sensory impressions, seemingly taking their beliefs for granted. Kant, on the other hand, like Hume, believes that sense impressions are how we understand the world. However, unlike Hume, our minds shape the world with these impressions; the mind arranges sensations, transforms them into objects. After all, sensations cannot organize themselves, and yet humans constantly see a variety of sensory impressions as physical objects. During an intermission in the lecture, Hume and Kant take a walk to re-energize their minds. Besides, they cross paths. Both intellectuals, they decide to engage in an informal conversation on the subject themselves. As the walk is short, they decide to give each other a chance to explain their thoughts and convince the other. They f...... middle of paper ... provide true knowledge since these laws must apply to all objects. Therefore, I cannot agree with your conclusion even though part of your theory is sound. "Shortly after this conversation, the two return to the conference. Several decades later, other conferences are still debating the value of physics and other questions are raised that would force Hume and Kant to revise their arguments so that They address various issues including the fact that physics is slowly moving away from certainty and universality. Instead, it is becoming based on probabilities, even though many of the probabilities are astronomically. Also, now that we can detect the transfer of energy, Hume's argument about causality is no longer as strong. Finally, if physics and other sciences hold no real knowledge, how can we. apply science to visualize, detect and create new objects ??