Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:03 pm That is nonsense. Many experiments are done by scientists confident that their beliefs will be vindicated. Equally, many experiments are done precisely because other scientists' data are not believed. That scientists are completely impartial is a fantasy that can only be believed by someone who has never met a scientist. Dumb! Fucking! Fantasist!
You are only making my point about the utterly incoherent conception of belief! Dumb! Fucking! Philosopher!

I am not talking about the social aspect of science - nobody is impartial! There is no such thing as unmotivated reasoning.
The usual conception of "belief" is such that the motivating aspect of uncertainty plays no part in the content of one's beliefs: that's bullshit.

You are literally affirming that both camps are uncertain!

Certain people don't bother with experiments - they don't give sufficient weight (psychologically OR socially) to the alternative hypothesis to even bother with that game.

When last did you invest our precious time in vindicating Round Earth against Flat Earthers?
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:25 amYou are only making my point about the utterly incoherent conception of belief! Dumb! Fucking! Philosopher!
And you are missing my point that should you ever meet any actual human beings, you will discover that most of them couldn't care less about coherence and will believe what they want to believe, because that's what they want to believe.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:25 amYou are literally confirming that both camps are uncertain! Certain people don't do experiments - they don't give sufficient weight to the alternative hypothesis to be bothered with vindication OR falsification.
I literally am not. Some people believe things which are wrong. You, for example.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:07 am
Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:25 amYou are only making my point about the utterly incoherent conception of belief! Dumb! Fucking! Philosopher!
And you are missing my point that should you ever meet any actual human beings, you will discover that most of them couldn't care less about coherence and will believe what they want to believe, because that's what they want to believe.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:25 amYou are literally confirming that both camps are uncertain! Certain people don't do experiments - they don't give sufficient weight to the alternative hypothesis to be bothered with vindication OR falsification.
I literally am not. Some people believe things which are wrong. You, for example.
Way to ignore the point that my conception of what "beliefs" is utterly different to yours.

So you judge my conception using your conception and you assert that my conception is "wrong".

Round of applause.
Last edited by Skepdick on Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:19 amWay to ignore the point that my conception of what "beliefs" are is utterly different to yours.
Duh! You will believe your belief about beliefs, because that's what you want to believe.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:26 am Duh! You will believe your belief about beliefs, because that's what you want to believe.
Duh! My conception of 'belief' is purpose-built.

And you believe your beliefs about beliefs despite me pointing out their short-commings (which obviously don't matter to you).

If humans believe what they want to believe why would they bother doing experiments that vindicate what they already believe? What were you suspecting requires vindication?
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:29 amIf humans believe what they want to believe why would they bother doing experiments that vindicate what they already believe?
Because they want to make things work, you idiot! There is no way you are a scientist. Dumb! Fucking! Fantasist!
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:34 am Because they want to make things work, you idiot! There is no way you are a scientist. Dumb! Fucking! Fantasist!
But you are stuck in the same conundrum, you dumb fucking philosopher.

Do you believe your toaster works or do you believe your toaster doesn't work?

Why would you want to make your toaster work if you already believe that your toaster works?!?!?!
Why would you want to vindicate that your toaster works if your toaster already works?!?!?!?
Last edited by Skepdick on Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Terrapin Station »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:14 am
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:11 pmIn general, people have very few contradictory beliefs--at least not where they parse the beliefs as contradictory (as opposed to someone else concluding that they're contradictory at least in their implications).
I think the key here is whether people parse/analyse/deconstruct their beliefs and whether they care about the implications. Two of the pillars to western philosophy, Christianity and science, each maintain completely antithetical beliefs. Christianity holds that a person who would tolerate eternal torture is a bad person, but a god who does so is a good god. In science, special relativity says space is a void, general relativity says it's a smooth substance, quantum mechanics says it's lumpy. There are people who are pragmatic; Christians might say 'Meh, God works in mysterious ways', scientists can pick up whatever instrument works best; but there are people who can't let it go; Christian apologists and theoretical physicists for example. The difference is that the former have a book as their source material, the latter a universe. Christians who worry about contradictions are stuck with cognitive dissonance, scientists can try something completely different.
Terrapin Station wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:11 pmNo one can prove any empirical claim. So no, people do not believe both P and not-P on the basis of not being able to prove either.
It depends what you mean by 'prove'. Logical or mathematical 'proofs' don't necessarily apply to the world as studied by physics. You can't logically or mathematically 'prove' that heavier than air objects will fall, but you can prove it to most people's satisfaction by dropping one.
Re proof, if we've proved that P, then it shouldn't be the case that possibly not-P, but for empirical claims, both P and not-P are always possibilities.

But yeah, I think we're getting at the same thing. There are reasons, based on evidence for example, that people believe one possibility over a contrary possibility. This, as I noted earlier, is what we should be focusing on rather than certainty, proofs, etc.--the reasons that we believe one possibility rather than another.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Terrapin Station »

Skepdick apparently has a very odd view of what belief is, where he is of the view that if one believes that P, one thinks that not-P is impossible, and therefore one wouldn't bother brooking not-P in the slightest. Apparently he's thinking of belief that P as analogous to being absolutely certain that P, or having proof that P. His comments about this stuff wouldn't make sense unless he was thinking something in the vein of this.

Why he's parsing belief that way, who knows? One guess could be that maybe he's dealt a lot with very dogmatic religious believers who stressed the idea of belief in that context? I suspect that's in the background of a lot of the "I don't believe anything" types of folks. (Or at least their views on what belief is were influenced by folks with that in their backgrounds.)
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:35 amDo you believe your toaster works or do you believe your toaster doesn't work?
That is only an issue in your idiot world where 'believe' has the meaning you wish it to have. Me, I just pop the bread in and if the toaster works goody-goody. If not, oh well, it's cornflakes for breakfast.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Terrapin Station »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:48 am
Skepdick wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:35 amDo you believe your toaster works or do you believe your toaster doesn't work?
That is only an issue in your idiot world where 'believe' has the meaning you wish it to have. Me, I just pop the bread in and if the toaster works goody-goody. If not, oh well, it's cornflakes for breakfast.
I'd say that unless you have reasons to believe that your toaster might not work--say that it's been very unreliable in the past, for example, popping bread in it and pulling the lever/pushing the button, etc. indicates a belief that the toaster works (or will work). Contra what seems to be Skepdick's view, this of course doesn't imply that you think that it's impossible that it won't work.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Terrapin Station wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:36 amRe proof, if we've proved that P, then it shouldn't be the case that possibly not-P, but for empirical claims, both P and not-P are always possibilities.

But yeah, I think we're getting at the same thing. There are reasons, based on evidence for example, that people believe one possibility over a contrary possibility. This, as I noted earlier, is what we should be focusing on rather than certainty, proofs, etc.--the reasons that we believe one possibility rather than another.
I think the thing to bare in mind is that there are all sorts of things that can count as evidence, all sorts of interpretations and all sorts of personality types. Fundamentally, the last 60 or so years of philosophy has been about dealing with that. Just take one aspect of the personality type thingy. There is a sliding scale of conservatism to progressivism. Generally, conservative types are more comfortable with fewer ideas; they are more inclined towards things being 'true', thereby dismissing a whole bunch of other stuff as 'not true'. There are those who are more inclined to take logic or mathematics as 'true', as opposed to those who rely more on physical evidence. Add to that there are different fields which very often describe the same things but in different languages, and the whole world looks vastly more complicated than it already is.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by tillingborn »

Terrapin Station wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:54 amI'd say that unless you have reasons to believe that your toaster might not work--say that it's been very unreliable in the past...
It might not work because fuses blow and components wear out. I believe eventually the toaster will fail. Not today, as it happens. Bon appetit.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:48 am That is only an issue in your idiot world where 'believe' has the meaning you wish it to have. Me, I just pop the bread in and if the toaster works goody-goody. If not, oh well, it's cornflakes for breakfast.
Bullshit.

I am defaulting to your use of "belief" and in the context of you saying:
tillingborn wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:34 am Because they want to make things work, you idiot! There is no way you are a scientist. Dumb! Fucking! Fantasist!
You either believe that your toaster works (P) or you believe it doesn't work (not P).

Why would you want to make your toaster work if you believe that it already works?
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Prove An Independent Reality-in-Itself Exists

Post by Skepdick »

Terrapin Station wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:54 am Contra what seems to be Skepdick's view, this of course doesn't imply that you think that it's impossible that it won't work.
Impossibility is tied to utility.

You keep using your toaster UNTIL it stops working. For as long as your toaster keeps working you have no reason to believe that it doesn't work, despite the knowledge that it will eventually break.
Post Reply