Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 6512
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

TimeSeeker wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:01 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:33 am Example, say, You believe God exists.
Now what Framework and System can you bring about to justify that claim?
WHY do I need to justify my claims? ;)

Further more, "God exists" is not likely a phrase I would utter. The sequence of events would probably go something like this:

Veritas Aequitas: Do you believe in God?
TimeSeeker: Yes

THE END

Whether I am actually answering the question you are asking is YOUR ERROR not mine ;) In science - when you ask stupid questions you DO get stupid answers!

Q.E.D: What is the meaning of life, the universe and everything? 42!
This is weird.
If you are to ask me to justify anything, then it is OK I keep quiet or state 42?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:33 am You tell me, what Framework and System can you bring to justify God exists.
In an epistemic framework anything that is untestable/unfalsifiable (N.B unfalsifiable by WHOM?) is "out of scope". So anything that is unfalsifiable fits the bill for being called a 'God'.

Here is a short list of things that are unfalsifiable:

* ANY logical axiom (1 = 1)
* ANY INVENTED authority (law of excluded middle, law of non-contradiction)

Some people believe in the Gods of Aristotle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_logic

I do not. I believe in the God of Information.
42, QED.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

Post by TimeSeeker »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:19 am This is weird.
If you are to ask me to justify anything, then it is OK I keep quiet or state 42?
Weird TO WHOM?

42 might make perfect sense TO YOU! Exactly like the answer God makes perfect sense TO A THEIST!
That doesn't mean that I accept that as "sufficient justification". And so we are back to square one!

HOW DO WE DECIDE what is "sufficient justification" ?

If YOU asked ME to justify my beliefs I will ask you: WHY?

Are you the thought-police or something? What business is it of yours what goes on in my head? :)
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:33 am 42, QED.
Well, before you can talk about "God" or "42" first you need to define it in some MEANINGFUL way that BOTH OF US can agree to! And so first we need a theory of meaning.

Is that 42 in decimal, hexadecimal, octal? What?

HOW DO WE DECIDE a theory of meaning? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_grounding_problem

Turtles all the way down :)
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 6512
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

TimeSeeker wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:24 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:19 am This is weird.
If you are to ask me to justify anything, then it is OK I keep quiet or state 42?
Weird TO WHOM?

42 might make perfect sense TO YOU! Exactly like the answer God makes perfect sense TO A THEIST!
That doesn't mean that I accept that as "sufficient justification". And so we are back to square one!

HOW DO WE DECIDE what is "sufficient justification" ?

If YOU asked ME to justify my beliefs I will ask you: WHY?

Are you the thought-police or something? What business is it of yours what goes on in my head? :)
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:33 am 42, QED.
Well, before you can talk about "God" or "42" first you need to define it in some MEANINGFUL way that BOTH OF US can agree to! And so first we need a theory of meaning.

Is that 42 in decimal, hexadecimal, octal? What?

HOW DO WE DECIDE a theory of meaning? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_grounding_problem

Turtles all the way down :)
42. QED.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Can we trust our perceptions to tell us what's real?

Post by TimeSeeker »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:34 am 42. QED.
Theist!

In binary '4' and '2' don't exist! They are just illusions.

ONLY 1 and 0 exist!

And when (If! because it seems like you are getting bored) you provide a binary representation of "42", then I will ask. HOW DO YOU DECIDE Endianness ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endianness )

You see how stupid this game is without prior consensus for co-operation AND a shared objective ? :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

But more importantly: do you see how many DECISIONS you take for granted?
The hardest questions are UNDECIDABLE!
Post Reply