Epistemology

[Aldebaran]

True, but I suspect that an argument about epistemology, and concluding that we can't 'know' anything, wouldn't be helpful in an arguement about say, global warming, would it?

Of course it can; It would help both sides of the argument to conclude that they have no knowledge. Would that be accepted by all the most obvious conclusion would be: Always better to prevent than having to cure.
Would make these discussions as simple as you can get, no?

salaam.

 

[kyser_soze]

Of course it can; It would help both sides of the argument to conclude that they have no knowledge. Would that be accepted by all the most obvious conclusion would be: Always better to prevent than having to cure.
Would make these discussions as simple as you can get, no?

salaam.

No, because someone could then say 'You don't KNOW about prevention being better than cure, so we don't have to do anything.'

Which would get you nowhere. Which is why this argument is bollocks...

 

[Aldebaran]

No, because someone could then say 'You don't KNOW about prevention being better than cure, so we don't have to do anything.'

Which would get you nowhere. Which is why this argument is bollocks...

On which almost everyone with some form of sanity would reply: We don't need to know to have a belief in our experiences with what is the best option of both.

salaam

 

[Santino]

I would be fascinated to learn the name of a single person who 'makes their living' from 'denying that knowledge is impossible'. Just one.

 

[bluestreak]

I would be fascinated to learn the name of a single person who 'makes their living' from 'denying that knowledge is impossible'. Just one.

Mrs BJ Smagma,
The Park Bench
Elms Drive
Preston

Although she actually makes her living frigging herself for pennies thrown by passing cackling chav, the only thing she can be heard to say ever is "knowledge is not impossible knowledge is not impossible knowledge is not buggeroff impossible"...

 

[max_freakout]

Max, this whole argument, for the purpose of eating, drinking, mating, meeting people etc is completely pointless. The only time it's relevant is in pointless discussions about it like this.

epistemology is pointless, this discussion has a point, insofar as it clarifies the pointlessness of epistemology, and asks why does epistemology exist?

 

[max_freakout]

I would be fascinated to learn the name of a single person who 'makes their living' from 'denying that knowledge is impossible'. Just one.

then go through the list of authors who's papers appear in the books mentioned at the start of this thread, there are many of them, and a few have been named in the thread, such as Hilary Putnam, David Lewis, and a few others

 

[max_freakout]

True, but I suspect that an argument about epistemology, and concluding that we can't 'know' anything, wouldn't be helpful in an arguement about say, global warming, would it?

I think this has a very blunt and obvious impilcation for global warming 'arguments'

arguing about global warming, is just as pointless (if not moreso), as arguinfg about the impossiblility of knowledge


because knowledge is impossible

 

[bluestreak]

epistemology is pointless, this discussion has a point, insofar as it clarifies the pointlessness of epistemology, and asks why does epistemology exist?

actually, I think the only people who come out of this arguement with the belief that epistomology is pointless are exactly the same people who have come into it with the that argument and have completely failed to provide any evidence or rationale behind their arguments, nor indeed to be able to engage 90% of those in disagreement.

The answer is that epistomology exists because most intelligent people are interested in the nature of knowledge, what it is, where it comes from, if it exists etc etc.

 

[max_freakout]

The answer is that epistomology exists because most intelligent people are interested in the nature of knowledge, what it is, where it comes from, if it exists etc etc.

But epistemology has been unable to show how knowledge could possibly exist

epistemology has been trying to prove that knowledge exists, but has failed

because knowledge is impossible

 

[bluestreak]

Which you haven't proved in a way that can't be argued with.

 

[bluestreak]

http://changingminds.org/techniques/resisting/broken_record.htm

 

[max_freakout]

Which you haven't proved in a way that can't be argued with.

i dont need to prove that epistemology hasnt proven that knowledge is possible, because the burden is on epistemology to do the proving.

I have studied epistemology in great depth, and it absolutely *has not* achieved the impossible and proven the unprovable, epistemology does not address the sceptical position, and is instead set up purely for the purpose of avoiding facing up to sceptisism. If epistemology truly faced up to sceptisism, it would disprove its own logic and its reason for existing

Epistemology exists, in order to avoid facing the fact that is is completely unneccesary, because knowledge is impossible

 

[bluestreak]

Is the job of epistemology to prove that knowledge is possible though? Most people would describe epistemology like the dictionary does: a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge. Which it does very well. For everyone except you, that is, who studies a different version than anyone else.

 

[max_freakout]

Is the job of epistemology to prove that knowledge is possible though? Most people would describe epistemology like the dictionary does: a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge. Which it does very well. For everyone except you, that is, who studies a different version than anyone else.

i studied the books i mentioned at the start of the thread, which is standard, modern western epistemology, the same as everyone else

and while they investigate the origin, they havent discovered the origin, they havent identified the limits, or discovered the nature, of knowledge

this is because knowledge is impossible

 

[Santino]

I have studied epistemology in great depth

lollylollylulz

 

[Jonti]

If there is anything one cannot doubt, then one cannot doubt that knowledge is possible.

 

[bodach]

If there is nothing one cannot doubt, then one cannot doubt that knowledge is possible.

That works just as well.

 

[Jonti]

LOL, yes!

 

[i-am-your-idea]

most intelligent people are interested in the nature of knowledge, what it is, where it comes from, if it exists etc etc.

i think wise people recognise the impossiblity of ever knowing something. like someone said, its the kind of helpful advice parents tell their children 'dont be too sure of yourself'. they recognise that all the beliefs they have, are just that. they are ALWAYS open to being wrong.

so yeah, intelligent people might be interested in what knowledge is, and spend their days trying to pin the butterfly down, but wise people know that they know nothing, and any attempt to pin a belief down as a Truth is a corruption of real truth which lies in the void.

 

[Jonti]

What cannot you doubt?

that you can doubt anything

That will do nicely.

Can you think of anything else you cannot doubt?

 

[bodach]

Can you think of anything else you cannot doubt?

If you can think, then you can doubt.

 

[Jonti]

I don't doubt it.

Whatever we want; whatever we please,
Can play in our heads with consummate ease.

Heh!

 

[Kizmet]

You see, it's tedious stuff like this that wins you no favours Kiz

Love it. 19 pages of the most mind-numbing and pointless shite. And a quick joke gets called tedious.

If that's how it's going to work, kyser, don't do me any favours.

'Don't eat apple cores, they'll give you appendicitis' - that's an old wives tale.
'Don't think you know everything' - that's parental advice. Along with other classics like 'If you fall and break your leg, dont' come running to me'

I guess what I'm saying is that, on some things, maybe some folk should listen to their mum a bit more.

Although I figure apples cores should be ok....

 

[Kizmet]

I don't doubt it.Heh!

That was Status Quo, wasn't it?

The 'b' side of Burning Bridges.. it was called Epistemology - white mens dominos.

 

[bodach]

Thinks about epistemology of metaphors.

 

[bluestreak]

*suffers from quophobia - the irrational fear of status quo*

 

[bodach]

*suffers from quophobia - the irrational fear of status quo*

Or the irrational feel of being with your woman.

 

[Santino]

i think wise people recognise the impossiblity of ever knowing something. like someone said, its the kind of helpful advice parents tell their children 'dont be too sure of yourself'. they recognise that all the beliefs they have, are just that. they are ALWAYS open to being wrong.

so yeah, intelligent people might be interested in what knowledge is, and spend their days trying to pin the butterfly down, but wise people know that they know nothing, and any attempt to pin a belief down as a Truth is a corruption of real truth which lies in the void.

Your professed commitment to there being no knowledge is somewhat undermined by your sweeping judgements about what 'wise' people do. How adolescently arrogant.

 

[max_freakout]

If there is anything one cannot doubt, then one cannot doubt that knowledge is possible.

there lies the conundrum of epistemology