04 Mar 17
Originally posted by apathistI think, if twhitehead is a map, you have completely misread him.
I don't think you are dishonest on purpose, tw. You are all over the map, so sometimes you are not as sharp as you want to be. What does it take for you to fully engage. I want access to your mind.
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadHe said, wishfully.
Is it not obvious?
Here are some issues you have brought up:
1. A supposed Infinite regress.
This doesn't go away when you drop the truth requirement.
2. The inability to know whether something you think you know is true.
This doesn't go away when you drop the truth requirement.
3. Your slippery slope argument about justification follows from the infinite regress problem.
This doesn't go away when you drop the truth requirement.
1. the regress is real
2. worth exploring
3. Not slippery, just needs acknowledged. Maybe you have a point here.
I am not your nemesis. Am just a random thinker. Get over yourself.
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by apathistI never thought you were my nemesis. And I note that you have not understood my post in the slightest. I pointed out that the problems don't go away when you remove the truth requirement. You asked for clarification. I provided it. You appear to have either forgotten that, or agreed with me - its not clear from the above.
He said, wishfully.
1. the regress is real
2. worth exploring
3. Not slippery, just needs acknowledged. Maybe you have a point here.
I am not your nemesis. Am just a random thinker. Get over yourself.
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo assume that K is JB. What problems do you see that did not exist when K was JTB?
I never thought you were my nemesis. And I note that you have not understood my post in the slightest. I pointed out that the problems don't go away when you remove the truth requirement. You asked for clarification. I provided it. You appear to have either forgotten that, or agreed with me - its not clear from the above.
btw You are not a clear speaker. You pronounce and move on. I am muddled myself and so need like extra clarity.
05 Mar 17
2 edits
Originally posted by apathistNone other than it causes confusion because it doesn't match with our every day understanding of the word.
So assume that K is JB. What problems do you see that did not exist when K was JTB?
Definitions ultimately do not change reality, they are just a way of communicating. Definitions that make communication harder by confusing the listener are counter productive. If you want to discus justified belief, then why not just call it justified belief. You seem quite OK with using the abbreviation JB so saying that you need a shorter word is hardly an excuse for taking another word that typically means something else.
btw You are not a clear speaker.
Have you considered that the problem lies with you? Nobody else seems to have trouble understanding my posts. Further, you tend to act like you did understand them but didn't like the content. Your main complaint seems to be that I don't agree with everything you say.
I started in this thread by pointing out that the OP seems to be self contradictory (obvious to everyone and probably intentional) and doesn't fit with the standard definition for 'knowledge'. You seem to think that I should have written a 1000 word essay on the subject. This is an internet forum. I come here as a break between writing code, watching youtube and various other things. I don't come here to write books.
I have suggested multiple times that when something isn't clear, you ask for clarification. But you don't. Instead you start with criticism, rudeness and accusations, and occasionally making up what you think I would have said if I were you. A few posts ago, you took the right approach and asked for clarification, albeit rudely, and I took the time to explain - at which point you acted like you couldn't remember that you asked and tried to criticize my explanation out of context. You are yet to acknowledge that I was correct.
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by twhitehead... A few posts ago, you took the right approach and asked for clarification, albeit rudely, and I took the time to explain - at which point you acted like you couldn't remember that you asked and tried to criticize my explanation out of context. You are yet to acknowledge that I was correct.You are the bomb. tw, but human knowledge is still not truth. It is just our best guess.
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by apathistI note that you didn't respond to my posts about that. Please go back and respond to them.
Knowledge is our understanding. Which changes as we learn more.
That is how the real world uses the word.
Do you believe that Newton knew the laws of motion of real world objects?
Do you believe that Freaky knows the earth is flat?