epistemology is

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: How do you know?

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=493881 time=1612212582 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493880 time=1612212454 user_id=15238]
I said, and i quote: "There's no pragmatic difference between this long list of shit."
If you understand those ideas, look to the center of them. That's my theory.
[/quote]
I am looking to the center of them.

I am at always at the center.

Why can't you tell me anything about this incessantly-prevalent self-reference?

It makes all the pragmatic difference in the world to a computer scientist.
[/quote]

If you don't want my conceptual framework, you can always look to the empirical as your starting point. It seems to me that you're asking for specific answers to entirely nonspecific questions.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How do you know?

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:05 pm If you don't want my conceptual framework, you can always look to the empirical as your starting point. It seems to me that you're asking for specific answers to entirely nonspecific questions.
It's as specific as it gets. What is your theory of self?

What ARE you?

Your conceptual framework is devoid of a concept of "self"! You are a black box to you.

You are 100% certain THAT you are, and 0% certain WHAT you are.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: How do you know?

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=493888 time=1612218753 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493886 time=1612217137 user_id=15238]
If you don't want my conceptual framework, you can always look to the empirical as your starting point. It seems to me that you're asking for specific answers to entirely nonspecific questions.
[/quote]
It's as specific as it gets. What is your theory of self?

What ARE you?

Your conceptual framework is devoid of a concept of "self"! You are a black box to you.

You are 100% certain THAT you are, and 0% certain WHAT you are.
[/quote]

I was speaking to the kernel of self. What i am specifically is irrelevant, but if you must know, all individual selves are some form of association matrix. Your wife feels like a part of yourself and if she disappears you feel diminished. Some people do not associate with body parts - body dysmorphia. Phineas Gage. Some people self-identify with their race. The notion of self is individual. We can only talk about the attributes people tend to share with specific examples. There's no Necessary definition of self, other than the core. Each person must define themselves for themselves, or latch on to whatever floats by. Yes, you're definitely asking for specific answers to utterly non-specific questions. I don't care to talk about who i am to most people. Who are You?
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How do you know?

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:49 pm I was speaking to the kernel of self. What i am specifically is irrelevant.
How can it be irrelevant?!? How the hell are you ever going to understand reality , if you don't understand the very thing you use to understand reality WITH.
Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:49 pm but if you must know, all individual selves are some form of association matrix.
This seems implausible. Matrices are static. I am not.

Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:49 pm There's no Necessary definition of self, other than the core.
Yeah! Tell be something about that core! What's inside it? You keep dancing around it!
Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:49 pm Each person must define themselves for themselves, or latch on to whatever floats by. Yes, you're definitely asking for specific answers to utterly non-specific questions. I don't care to talk about who i am to most people.
You don't even have a model of "self" - you don't care to talk about you because you are a black box to you.

You have nothing to say!
Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:49 pm Who are You?
"I" is recursive. I am a thing that does recursion.

Google "recursion theory".
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: epistemology is

Post by Terrapin Station »

Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:43 pm >So how do you parse epistemology you read where the philosopher in question isn't at all concerned with certainty?

Either they're wrong or they're not doing epistemology.
If you think that they're not doing epistemology, then you're hardly understanding it.
>What in the world??? No idea what any sentence there is saying, exactly. It seems like a bunch of vague, misunderstood gobbledygook.

Certainty cannot mean an understanding that is never subject to update. That sort of transcendent definition renders a word useless.

There is no Ultimate certainty.
How are you defining "certainty" then?
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: epistemology is

Post by Advocate »

[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=493907 time=1612224104 user_id=12582]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493845 time=1612204995 user_id=15238]
>So how do you parse epistemology you read where the philosopher in question isn't at all concerned with certainty?

Either they're wrong or they're not doing epistemology.

[/quote]
If you think that they're not doing epistemology, then you're hardly understanding it.

[quote]
>What in the world??? No idea what any sentence there is saying, exactly. It seems like a bunch of vague, misunderstood gobbledygook.

Certainty cannot mean an understanding that is never subject to update. That sort of transcendent definition renders a word useless.

There is no Ultimate certainty.
[/quote]
How are you defining "certainty" then?
[/quote]

It is always purpose dependent.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: epistemology is

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:01 am How are you defining "certainty" then?
How are you defining "defining"?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: epistemology is

Post by bahman »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:44 am Epistemology is the theory of knowledge.

A good epistemic theory is supposed to answer questions about the self:

What is knowledge?
How do I acquire knowledge?
Why do I acquire knowledge?
How do I revise knowledge?
How do I use knowledge?
How do I know that I know?
This. And, how do I know that I don't know?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: epistemology is

Post by Terrapin Station »

Advocate wrote: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:10 am
Terrapin Station wrote: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:01 am
Advocate wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:43 pm >So how do you parse epistemology you read where the philosopher in question isn't at all concerned with certainty?

Either they're wrong or they're not doing epistemology.
If you think that they're not doing epistemology, then you're hardly understanding it.
>What in the world??? No idea what any sentence there is saying, exactly. It seems like a bunch of vague, misunderstood gobbledygook.

Certainty cannot mean an understanding that is never subject to update. That sort of transcendent definition renders a word useless.

There is no Ultimate certainty.
How are you defining "certainty" then?
It is always purpose dependent.
That's not a definition, is it?
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: epistemology is

Post by Advocate »

>>>How are you defining "certainty" then?

>>It is always purpose dependent.

>That's not a definition, is it?

That is not a definition, it is a clarification on previous work about a particular part of the question.

The definition of certainty is purpose dependent epistemological assurance of predictive accuracy. Good enough? If you don't like that, i have others.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: epistemology is

Post by Terrapin Station »

Advocate wrote: Tue Feb 02, 2021 3:09 pm The definition of certainty is purpose dependent epistemological assurance of predictive accuracy. Good enough?
If that's the definition you're using. I was just wondering how you'd define it. That's an unusual definition for "certainty," but there's nothing wrong with it as a definition.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: epistemology is

Post by Advocate »

[quote="Terrapin Station" post_id=493997 time=1612278112 user_id=12582]
[quote=Advocate post_id=493992 time=1612274977 user_id=15238]
The definition of certainty is purpose dependent epistemological assurance of predictive accuracy. Good enough?
[/quote]

If that's the definition you're using. I was just wondering how you'd define it. That's an unusual definition for "certainty," but there's nothing wrong with it as a definition.
[/quote]

Let's try to compress that: "anticipation of predictive accuracy", which implies intent contingency, and is relative to epistemological assurance in it's validity.
Post Reply