an_onanist

joined 2 years ago
[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

No I'm not. I am not interested in academic study. I am interested in real world application. I am aware of justified true belief and that most people don't apply it. My curiosity is in how people acnually think about the concept.

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

That is like the home owner's application of the scientific method: test the hypothesis until you decide it is a pretty solid system

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Your description makes belief sound like willful ignorance.

It sounds like the real challenge is knowing when you have enough information to convert your educated guess into full-blown knowledge

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What about the ideas that can be neither confirmed nor denied like the existence of extraterrestrial life or a machine of 100% efficiency?

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

What if you should have some doubt (belief) but due to ignorance or hubris do not and so you elevate a concept to 'knowledge' that should not rightfully be there? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm genuinely curious about that gray area of misplaced confidence.

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So, if we haven't studied the underlying axioms or foundation of a conclusion, we cannot have knowledge of it? That seems to imply the only things we have knowledge of are the things we have invested significant time and energy into. It's that correct?

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

If so much is contextual, is there no knowledge based on truth or fact?

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So the stronger the feeling of identifying with a concept, the stronger the belief that it is true?

 

I'm not interested in what the dictionary says or a textbook definition I'm interested in your personal distinction between the two ideas. How do you decide to put an idea in one category versus the other? I'm not interested in the abstract concepts like 'objective truth' I want to know how it works in real life for you.

 
[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

I'm 6 episodes in and loving it.

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I predicted in about 10 years disclaimers at the beginning will include, 'This show depicts murder. Neither the show's creators producers or actors condone the taking of another human life.'

[–] an_onanist@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

What if the claim were false?

What if she wasn't from Pitcairn? No big deal other than her credibility comes into question.

What if Gengis Kahn did not exist? Nothing lost, we already doubt our historical record.

What if Jesus did not exist? Suddenly the largest religion's foundation is gone.

What if God doesn't exist? Many people lose their reason for existing..

That which has enormous impact should require proof of truthfulness.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Basic blender went bad (motor ran but spindle wasn't rotating). I wanted to disassemble to see if it could be repaired. Three of the four screws were Phillips head. I had to cut the casing open in order to discover why I couldn't unscrew the fourth. It was a slotted spanner.

 
 
view more: next ›