Certain Knowledge

[Veritas Aequitas]

Point is you can never be absolute certain of anything ...

So, you are not certain of that. How odd. You argue as though you thought you were certain.

I am not 100% absolutely certain but 99.999 certain upon the Framework of Knowledge I relied upon.

[RCSaunders]

I am not 100% absolutely certain but 99.999 certain upon the Framework of Knowledge I relied upon.

How did you calculate that figure?

It doesn't matter. You either know something, or you don't. If you don't know anything (aren't certain about it) then you don't know anything.

It's like truth. A proposition is either true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost true. If it's not true, even only .001% not true, it's not true at all. It's like purity. Water is either 100% pure, or it's impure, even if it's only .001% impure.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I am not 100% absolutely certain but 99.999 certain upon the Framework of Knowledge I relied upon.

How did you calculate that figure?

It doesn't matter. You either know something, or you don't. If you don't know anything (aren't certain about it) then you don't know anything.

It's like truth. A proposition is either true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost true. If it's not true, even only .001% not true, it's not true at all. It's like purity. Water is either 100% pure, or it's impure, even if it's only .001% impure.

You are God as claimed by theists?

One thing for sure is you are not omniscient like what is claimed for God.

As human beings we are fallible thus need to be humble not claiming to be like God i.e. perfect in every sense, in this case, knowing perfectly with 100% certainty.

It is only in theory there is 100% pure water.
In practice, there is no way it can be 100% Hydrogen and Oxygen. A small variation in its constituents in terms of electrons, quarks and other particles meant it is not 100% pure, but perhap only 99.999..999% pure.

[Skepdick]

It's like truth. A proposition is either true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost true. If it's not true, even only .001% not true, it's not true at all. It's like purity. Water is either 100% pure, or it's impure, even if it's only .001% impure.

That's called "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

ALL scientific truths are approximations. Every. Single. One.

For somebody who riles up against academic philosophers, you sure think exactly like one.

[RCSaunders]

It's like truth. A proposition is either true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost true. If it's not true, even only .001% not true, it's not true at all. It's like purity. Water is either 100% pure, or it's impure, even if it's only .001% impure.

That's called "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

ALL scientific truths are approximations. Every. Single. One.

For somebody who riles up against academic philosophers, you sure think exactly like one.

Guess you are not familiar with Chemistry, or do you think sulfur is only approximately sulfur, and of course, heavier than air flight is only approximately possible, and lased light is only approximately true. I suppose you think pregnant and dead people are only approximately pregnant or dead as well.

[Skepdick]

Guess you are not familiar with Chemistry, or do you think sulfur is only approximately sulfur, and of course, heavier than air flight is only approximately possible, and lased light is only approximately true. I suppose you think pregnant and dead people are only approximately pregnant or dead as well.

We've had this discussion.

I guess you aren't familiar with isotopes of Sulphur.
You've heard of false positives on pregnancy, yes?
You've heard of resuscitation, yes?
You've heard of people being erroneously declared dead, yes?

Your entire line of argumentation boils down to a distinction between determinism and non-determinism.
How many times do you need to be schooled before you figure out the general pattern here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors

Much of statistical theory revolves around the minimization of one or both of these errors, though the complete elimination of either is a statistical impossibility for non-deterministic algorithms.

[RCSaunders]

As human beings we are fallible thus need to be humble not claiming to be like God i.e. perfect in every sense, in this case, knowing perfectly with 100% certainty.

What's wrong with you? Do you have any doubts about whether you are alive? Does that mean you think you are God? There are some things you must be certain about. You can deny what you know, close your eyes to the truth (evading the responsibility and using ignorance as your excuse), but you know you are conscious, you know you make choices, you know whatever you do you are responsible for.

You be humble. I have no one else to answer to.

[Skepdick]

You be humble. I have no one else to answer to.

Everybody has to answer to the consequences of their "certain" knowledge.

That's how error-correction happens.

[henry quirk]

Certain Does Not Mean Infallible Or Omniscient

The philosophers and mystics that want to convince you certain knowledge is not possible do not mean what you and I mean by certain knowledge.

Certain knowledge does not mean infallible knowledge. It does not mean one can never be mistaken, but that is what the deniers of knowledge mean. The fact that one can make mistakes does not mean they can only make mistakes. Mistakes are always exceptions.

[Skepdick]

Certain Does Not Mean Infallible Or Omniscient

The philosophers and mystics that want to convince you certain knowledge is not possible do not mean what you and I mean by certain knowledge.

Certain knowledge does not mean infallible knowledge. It does not mean one can never be mistaken, but that is what the deniers of knowledge mean. The fact that one can make mistakes does not mean they can only make mistakes. Mistakes are always exceptions.

You still fall for the silly word-play, eh?

Certain knowledge mandates NO exceptions.

Certainty, error, mistake, exception. It's different words for the same thing.

Certain. knowledge mandates omniscience.

It's like t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certainty. A proposition is either t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certainly true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain. If it's not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain, even only .001% not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain, it's not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain at all. It's like purity. W̶a̶t̶e̶r̶ Knowledge is either 100% p̶u̶r̶e̶ certain, or it's i̶m̶p̶u̶r̶e̶ uncertain, even if it's only .001% i̶m̶p̶u̶r̶e̶ uncertain.

[henry quirk]

Certain Does Not Mean Infallible Or Omniscient

The philosophers and mystics that want to convince you certain knowledge is not possible do not mean what you and I mean by certain knowledge.

Certain knowledge does not mean infallible knowledge. It does not mean one can never be mistaken, but that is what the deniers of knowledge mean. The fact that one can make mistakes does not mean they can only make mistakes. Mistakes are always exceptions.

You still fall for the silly word-play, eh?

Certain knowledge mandates NO exceptions.

Certainty, error, mistake, exception. It's different words for the same thing.

Certain. knowledge mandates omniscience.

It's like t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certainty. A proposition is either t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certainly true or it isn't. There is no such thing as almost t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain. If it's not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain, even only .001% not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain, it's not t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶ certain at all. It's like purity. W̶a̶t̶e̶r̶ Knowledge is either 100% p̶u̶r̶e̶ certain, or it's i̶m̶p̶u̶r̶e̶ uncertain, even if it's only .001% i̶m̶p̶u̶r̶e̶ uncertain.

whooosh! there goes the point, right over the peacock's head

[Skepdick]

whooosh! there goes the point, right over the peacock's head

I am pointing out that there was no point, so much as a mental diarrhoea on a canvas.

[henry quirk]

whooosh! there goes the point, right over the peacock's head

I am pointing that it wasn't a point, so much as a mental diarrhoea on a canvas.

if it were a nailhead you'd have smashed your thumb twice

If RC takes pity, mebbe he'll dumb it down for ya

[Skepdick]

if it were a nailhead you'd have smashed your thumb twice

If RC takes pity, mebbe he'll dumb it down for ya

You think it could be dumbed down further? Wow!

[RCSaunders]

if it were a nailhead you'd have smashed your thumb twice

If RC takes pity, mebbe he'll dumb it down for ya

You think it could be dumbed down further? Wow!

No, unfortunately, it cannot be. Once someone insists they do not know anything for certain, they have made it clear they are not certain anything they think, believe, or say is true. The only thing one can do is take their word for it.

Of course, that also means you cannot be certain anyone else is wrong. Henry's right, but you'll never know it.