Cerebral conversation

Had this intriguing discussion over dinner at Jack's Place. Explained to her the solution the "more coffee or more tea" conundrum, but she said that what her mind told her made my mathematical proof incredible.

Our conclusion?
That theory has its place as absolute but only in a set of given conditions. Unfortunately, in the practical and arbitrary world, there rarely exists such conditions. As such it is almost impossible to achieve cause and effect results.
Some examples include human error in doctors misdiagnosing illnesses. Symptoms may present themselves overwhelmingly as that of a particular illness but due to certain conditions not made known to the doctor, have been misconstrued as something else. It isn't really the doctor's fault, as he applied medical theory to his best ability, but the fact is the patient is still ill and unhappy. The doctor has to keep applying theory after theory to get the right result. This is an example of the dissonance between the lab conditions and practical conditions.

Moreover, this is also observable psychologically. I might be able to tell a person the right thing to do from my third-person view. But the person may feel differently. No one's at fault here. The person is right because he cannot feel objectively because of his emotions and how he feels. I am right because I feel it is the best thing to do in his situation, though I do not have to deal with the conflicting emotions he has. Empathy goes some way to helping him appreciate the appropriate and objective solution.

Jasmine, could you embellish these points?