The majority of theists believe their divine-FSK is credible, surely you are not agreeing with that?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:21 amBut the credibility of the FSK is a factor of the number of people who believe it is accurate in describing reality.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:50 amAre you familiar with Framework and System, i.e. of Knowledge [FSK], Reality [FSR] or if you prefer Beliefs [FSB].FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:21 am
Did you do that move because you know it is true that there are exactly zero persons who aren't you that think your FSK is credible?
So you decided that you wished I had written something else.
It is obvious scientific knowledge are generated within a scientific FSK and the majority believe the scientific FSK is credible in general. But there is no guarantee of credibility in particular cases due to biasness because of funding, and cheats.
Let say we rate the credibility of the scientific FSK at 90/100.
The majority of theists also insist their claims from a divine based framework and system are spiritual knowledge, thus the theistic-FSK. You cannot stop them from using the term FSK. Theists will rate the credibility of their theistic-FSK at 100/100.
But for the more rational people, the theistic-FSK so claimed is not credible and rational non-theists would likely rate the credibility of the theistic-FSK at 5/100.
At this stage I do not expect anyone to rate the credibility of my FSK.
Since my moral FSK is similar [not exactly] with the features of the scientific FSK at 90/100, I would personally rate it >80/100.
Features of the Scientific FSK to support its credibility
viewtopic.php?p=489333#p489333
Since my FSK is similar to the scientific FSK it cannot be the same as the theistic-FSK.
Based on inference if anyone were to rate my moral FSK it would be at least be rated at >50/100, thus my moral FSK is credible based on the above inference.
Your FSK has one person only who believes any such thing, everyone else thinks it is stupid.
Your arguments, by which you hope to persuade people that your FSK does describe a reality all depend on the FSK itself.
Therefore people who don't already believe the FSK don't have any reason to believe them.
Therefore the FSK can never be credible.
And therefore none of the arguments which depend on a credible FSK can be true.
Other belief systems which provide argument that can only persuade existing believers have the same problem, but they at least benefit from having some believers. You don't even have that. You are a one man cult.
What I am referring to is credibility with an objective basis based on the criteria Iisted in the links above, i.e. it can be independent of people's opinions and beliefs.
You think just because Peter, Sculptor and Terrapin agrees with your views, they are deemed to be credible?
In the absence of other people agreeing to my FSK, its credibility can still be rated objectively based on the criteria listed above.