There is at least one thing that you believe to know with absolute certainty, which is that you know with absolute certainty that you don't know anything with absolute certainty. But I get your point, I'm not absolutely certain that I agree, but its something to think about.
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Socrates philosophy and method
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostI only believe you cannot know for absolute certainty. So far you have not clarified your position differentiating certainty from clams of absolute truth from the human perspective.
Yes they could be right, but I do not believe that can be right for absolutely certain.
So, again, your skepticism undermines itself, and prevents you from saying anything definite about knowledge.
My position: Humans can make mistakes, and can be wrong about things. But there exist real truths, and we can know, and be certain about, those truths.
That doesn't mean that everything we know is certain, nor does it mean that nothing we know is certain. We should proportion our degree of certainty about a truth claim on the evidence we have for it. Since the available evidence for a claim can vary from person to person, different people can (rationally) have different degrees of certainty about any particular claim.
Also, on the Christian worldview, humans were designed with the ability to know and have a meaningful relationship with God, and thus with the ability to correctly apprehend real truths. So it is at least possible for humans to know some truths with absolute certainty.
Originally posted by Shunyadragon. . . because it is the rational and intellectually honest and positive way to go with the Socratic Philosophy and Method.
No coherent response here.
But that's not what you did. You obviously do understand the bulk of my response, since you replied to it, and thus it was coherent - you demonstrate that by your own actions.
Originally posted by ShunyadragonIt would be a rational positive attitude if you would reread my post and respond constructively.
Pointing out that there are serious problems with a global skepticism, and asking questions to clarify exactly what you are saying (both of which I have done) is constructive, in that it moves the conversation forward to a deeper understanding, and allows you to rethink your own position in the light of challenges to it. Perhaps you will see some problems, and modify, or abandon your current position for a better one - that would be constructive. Perhaps you will feel that your position withstands those challenges, and move on with a greater degree of certainty - that is also constructive.
Originally posted by ShunyadragonI edited it to clarify some points.
So far you have not clarified your position differentiating certainty from clams of absolute truth from the human perspective.
Analogy: People can be wrong about maths addition problems. Therefore no-one can know the true answer for any maths addition problem.
Clearly that doesn't follow. I submit that your reasoning about absolute truth claims follows the same flawed model....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostBut you yourself aren't (can't be) absolutely certain about that, either. So it is possible that someone could be certain about something.
So, again, your skepticism undermines itself, and prevents you from saying anything definite about knowledge.
My position: Humans can make mistakes, and can be wrong about things. But there exist real truths, and we can know, and be certain about, those truths.
That doesn't mean that everything we know is certain, nor does it mean that nothing we know is certain. We should proportion our degree of certainty about a truth claim on the evidence we have for it. Since the available evidence for a claim can vary from person to person, different people can (rationally) have different degrees of certainty about any particular claim.
Also, on the Christian worldview, humans were designed with the ability to know and have a meaningful relationship with God, and thus with the ability to correctly apprehend real truths. So it is at least possible for humans to know some truths with absolute certainty.
This is one of your pet phrases that is needlessly dismissive, and unhelpful. Further, it makes no sense. If a reply wasn't at all coherent, you would have to simply ask for clarification, or for the person to rephrase their response entirely, since an incoherent response makes no sense.
But that's not what you did. You obviously do understand the bulk of my response, since you replied to it, and thus it was coherent - you demonstrate that by your own actions.
Pointing out that there are serious problems with a global skepticism, and asking questions to clarify exactly what you are saying (both of which I have done) is constructive, in that it moves the conversation forward to a deeper understanding, and allows you to rethink your own position in the light of challenges to it. Perhaps you will see some problems, and modify, or abandon your current position for a better one - that would be constructive. Perhaps you will feel that your position withstands those challenges, and move on with a greater degree of certainty - that is also constructive.
Bottom line: Just because someone can be wrong doesn't mean that they are (always) wrong. So, I think you go too far in rejecting a priori all absolute truth claims on the basis that we can be wrong.
You still have not clarified the difference between certainty and absolute truth claims in your view.
Analogy: People can be wrong about maths addition problems. Therefore no-one can know the true answer for any maths addition problem.
Clearly that doesn't follow. I submit that your reasoning about absolute truth claims follows the same flawed model.Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-11-2016, 11:56 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThere is at least one thing that you believe to know with absolute certainty, which is that you know with absolute certainty that you don't know anything with absolute certainty. But I get your point, I'm not absolutely certain that I agree, but its something to think about.
Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-13-2016, 07:29 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostI thought we had been over this awkward fallacy turf before. You are neck deep in the Fallacy of self-refutation, and very very far from anything I have proposed nor claimed. Are you being sarcastic, ironic, or just cute? If this is a serious challenge on your part pease cite me specifically and cite the fallacy I have committed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostSo, you are not absolutely certain that we can't know anything with absolute certainty?
Are you willing to challenge our American legal system based on the Socratic Philosophy and method where there are no absolutes and all convictions are based on 'beyond reasonable doubt,' and not convictions in terms of absolutes?
In reality our legal system: Our courts decisions "are not absolutely certain and we can't know anything legally with absolute certainty."Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-13-2016, 07:53 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostSo, you are not absolutely certain that we can't know anything with absolute certainty?
Oh, looks like seer caught onto this last month when shunya first started using it as an argument, but apparently shunya's reading comprehension is so bad that he can't seem to understand that it undermines his own argument.
Sad, but predictable.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostYeah, I don't get this. This Bennett fellow seems to be refuting shunyadragon, not helping his argument. He says, "Just to reiterate, the position is ONLY illogical if someone were to claim certainty that there is no certainty, or similar self-refutation" which is precisely what shunya appears guilty of. shunya is providing the ammunition to shoot his own argument down.
Oh, looks like seer caught onto this last month when shunya first started using it as an argument, but apparently shunya's reading comprehension is so bad that he can't seem to understand that it undermines his own argument.
Sad, but predictable.
Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-14-2016, 04:49 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostSad, but predictable. Apparently Adrift's, seer's JimL's, and Sparko's reading comprehension is so bad that they can't seem to understand in plan English that it undermines their own arguments.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
I believe I will up the anti concerning the concept of 'Certainty' and philosophical issues as of how 'certainty' applies to the real world. It is also interesting that a number of Twebbers have objected to my views, but failed to address Socrates Methods and Philosophy on which it is based.
For example, when I brought up our legal system and the measure of Socratic certainty that determines legal guilt is based on the same philosophical assumption I base my world view . . . there was silence.
Certainty is not as idealistically certain as many want it to be to justify their beliefs.
Certainty part I
Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-24-2016, 06:14 PM.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
173 responses
643 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
06-07-2024, 07:30 AM
|
Comment